ReviewPediatric research2026
Evidence strength of exposure-outcome associations in pediatric allergic diseases: an umbrella review of meta-analyses.
Review in Pediatric research, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPediatric allergic diseases are influenced by a wide range of environmental, perinatal, and developmental exposures; however, the strength and credibility of reported associations remain unclear.
objectiveWe conducted an umbrella review to systematically evaluate and grade the strength of evidence for exposure-outcome associations in pediatric allergic diseases.
methodsWe systematically searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses investigating exposures associated with pediatric allergic diseases. A total of 176 exposure-outcome associations were extracted and re-evaluated using standardized evidence grading criteria, incorporating statistical significance, heterogeneity, sample size, and potential bias. Associations were classified into strong, highly suggestive, suggestive, and weak or non-suggestive evidence.
resultsSixty systematic reviews and meta-analyses comprising 176 exposure-outcome associations were included. Only three associations were supported by strong evidence: neonatal jaundice, pesticide exposure, and postnatal maternal depression. Six associations were classified as highly suggestive (three from binary outcomes and three from continuous outcomes after applying a pragmatic sample size criterion), and eight as suggestive, while the remaining 159 associations were rated as weak or non-suggestive evidence. Overall, most associations showed limited robustness, with substantial heterogeneity and evidence of potential bias across studies.
conclusionOnly a small proportion of reported exposure-outcome associations in pediatric allergic diseases are supported by strong evidence. Early-life and environmental exposures, including perinatal factors and pesticide exposure, may represent important risk domains; however, most associations lack sufficient evidence to support causal inference. These findings highlight the need for higher-quality evidence and more rigorous evaluation of environmental risk factors in pediatric allergy research. IMPACT: This umbrella review systematically evaluates the strength of evidence for associations between multiple exposures and pediatric allergic diseases. Only a small proportion of associations are supported by strong or highly suggestive evidence, while most associations show weak or non-suggestive evidence. These findings highlight substantial uncertainty in the current literature and emphasize the need for more robust evidence before drawing causal or clinical conclusions.
Identifiers
42736441What 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.