ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2026
The evolution of pharmacological recommendations for anaphylaxis: a comparative analysis of established textbooks.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaphylaxis can be life-threatening-due to its rapid-progressing and often unpredictable nature. Especially in such medical emergencies, robust clinical trials regarding adjunctive therapies can be scarce and recommendations across literature may vary. Hence, the aim of this study is to investigate the evolution of recommendations for the pharmacological management of anaphylaxis in established pharmacology textbooks over time. The following German textbook series were included: Aktories, Lüllmann, and Karow. The US standard work Goodman & Gilman was reviewed for an international comparison. This study focuses on epinephrine, H
Indexed as
Identifiers
42503525What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.