MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382010501 · doi:10.1097/pec.0000000000003003

Variation in the Guidelines for the Acute Management of Anaphylaxis in Pediatric Patients

2023· article· en· W4382010501 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sophia Athanasopoulou, Stephanie Leeds, Marc Auerbach

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Emergency Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDosingAnaphylaxisIntensive care medicineConfusionResuscitationEpinephrineMEDLINEIntensive careEmergency medicinePediatricsAllergyAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Evidence-based guidelines have been created and disseminated by multiple organizations to standardize the care of pediatric patients with anaphylaxis. Differences across these guidelines can cause confusion and potentially errors in clinical practice leading to patient harm. The aim of this study was to describe and identify patterns of variation in the current guidelines. METHODS: A narrative review with 3 major components was designed. First, a narrative review of current, peer-reviewed, guidelines published by national and international allergy and immunology, pediatric, and emergency medicine organizations was performed. That was followed by a gray literature review of guidelines by resuscitation councils and national health organizations. The third component focused on the translation of these guidelines at local and institutional levels by reviewing clinical pathways published by academic institutions. RESULTS: With regard to the fixed epinephrine autoinjector dosing, 50% (6 of 12) of the reviewed guidelines offered weight-based and 41.7% (5 of 12) age-based dosing recommendations. Furthermore, different weight cutoffs for the 0.15- and 0.3-mg autoinjectors were identified among guidelines. Variation was identified in the description of intramuscular epinephrine concentration ("1:1000," "1 mg/mL," or both), the recommended concentration for intravenous administration ("1:10,000" or "1:1000"), or the rate of infusion or titration. Eight of the 12 guidelines (66.7%) recommend a dose in milligrams, and 33.3% (4 of 12) in micrograms. Five of 12 (41.7%) used both milliliters and milligrams or micrograms. CONCLUSIONS: Notable variation in the current guidelines for the acute management of anaphylaxis in the pediatric population was identified. Flagging this variability could help inform a consensus-based approach toward harmonization of guidelines, which in turn could streamline the management of anaphylaxis in pediatric patients across the United States, Canada, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, and hopefully prevent errors and mitigate patient harm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.189
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.189
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Emergency CareSame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207