Real World Management of Anaphylaxis Versus the NICE Guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Anaphylaxis is an acute, life-threatening allergic reaction involving multiple systems caused by the sudden release of mediators from mast cells. This study aims to assess the current practice of emergency management of adults and children diagnosed with anaphylaxis at the Royal Hospital, against the recommendations of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines. Methods: This is an observational study of all anaphylaxis cases which took place at the emergency department (ED) during a 5-year period. Results: Of 100 patients with a preliminary diagnosis of anaphylaxis, 49% were true-anaphylaxis cases based on the WAO definition. All the 49-patients with true-anaphylaxis received adrenaline intramuscularly at ED. 24 (48.9%) of them were referred to an immunologist: 8/24 (33.3%) were adults and 16/24 (66.6%) were children. 16-children were admitted, seen by an immunologist and received an adrenaline autoinjector when indicated. 25 of the 33 adult patients (75.7%) were discharged from the ED with no onward referral to a specialist. None of the adult patients received an adrenaline autoinjector prior to discharge from ED and no one had a tryptase level checked. Conclusion: The paediatric emergency department fulfilled all the criteria for anaphylaxis management in accordance with NICE guidelines except for measuring serum tryptase where appropriate. By contrast, the adult patients were discharged from ED without an adrenaline autoinjector as an interim measure until seen by an allergist or immunologist. Therefore, education is the best strategy to improve the management of this severe and possible fatal condition.
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 | 0.025 | 0.111 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".