ArticlePediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric Society
A Survey of Parental Decision Making in the Selection of Adrenaline Self-Administration Devices.
Article in Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric Society. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, self-administered adrenaline therapies have expanded beyond conventional injectable formulations with the development of intranasal formulations, increasing the range of available delivery devices. This study aimed to clarify which factors are prioritized by parents or guardians of children carrying adrenaline auto-injectors and how they perceive different adrenaline delivery devices.
methodsA questionnaire-based survey was conducted from April to October 2025 among parents or guardians of children prescribed adrenaline auto-injectors. The survey assessed factors considered important in adrenaline formulations, including certainty of effectiveness, ease of administration, pain during administration, portability, and caregiver concerns.
resultsA total of 98 respondents were included in the analysis. The most highly prioritized factor for adrenaline self-administration was certainty of effectiveness, followed by ease of administration and portability. Regarding device selection, when no information about the formulations was provided, the highest proportion of respondents answered that they were "unable to decide". In a hypothetical scenario assuming equivalent efficacy of the two formulations, parents or guardians tended to prefer the intranasal device.
conclusionParents or guardians prioritized certainty of effectiveness when selecting adrenaline self-administration devices. Many respondents were unable to decide between injectable and intranasal devices when no information was provided, whereas preference shifted toward intranasal adrenaline in a hypothetical scenario assuming equivalent effectiveness. These findings suggest that evidence-based information sharing and device-specific education are important when introducing new adrenaline delivery options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.