Epinephrine auto injector administration by parents or patients for anaphylaxis during supervised oral food challenges and assessment of confidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Barriers to administering epinephrine auto injectors include failure to recognize signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis, administering oral antihistamines or asthma inhalers due to lack of education, failing to administer epinephrine correctly, fear of giving a needle, auto injector misplaced, and past experiences with spontaneous recovery. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of supervised auto injector administration by parents/patients on confidence, knowledge and skill for future treatment of severe allergic reactions. Patients with confirmed IgE-mediated food allergy at BC Children’s Hospital (2013-14), aged 2-17 years undergoing a physician supervised oral food challenge were approached and participation was voluntary. A pre- challenge questionnaire on patient and caregiver background information, confidence in recognizing a severe allergic reaction, and knowledge/skill in using an epinephrine auto-injector was completed by each participant. If an auto injector was deployed during the challenge, a post encounter questionnaire was administered to participants and practitioners collecting similar variables and qualitative data. There have been 39 participants in this ongoing study. Mean age was 7.3 years (SD 4.3). 87% of parents were university educated, 26% health professionals, and 64% reported English as their first language. Parents ranked their child’s food allergy as severe (2.74/3.00, 95%CI, 2.39-3.10), but had only experienced using an auto injector 0.28 (95%CI, 0.10-0.46) times in the past. Confidence levels with auto injector use were 3.31/5.00 (95%CI,2.91-3.71) and skill levels 2.51/5.00 (95%CI,2.13-2.90). Parents who were health professionals had almost twice as much confidence and skill as non-health professionals (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in confidence based on the number of times participants had experienced a severe reaction or used an auto injector in the community. Post challenge, 4 participants have required epinephrine, all administered by a parent. Our data suggest a moderate level of confidence but suboptimal skills in epinephrine auto injector use, influenced by whether parents are health professionals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".