↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Anaphylaxis across two Canadian pediatric centers: evaluating management disparities

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Asthma and Allergy, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Anaphylaxis across two Canadian pediatric centers: evaluating management disparities
Published in
Journal of Asthma and Allergy, December 2016
DOI 10.2147/jaa.s123053
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison YM Lee, Paul Enarson, Ann E Clarke, Sébastien La Vieille, Harley Eisman, Edmond S Chan, Christopher Mill, Lawrence Joseph, Moshe Ben-Shoshan

Abstract

There are no data on the percentage of visits due to anaphylaxis in the emergency department (ED), triggers, and management of anaphylaxis across different provinces in Canada. To compare the percentage of anaphylaxis cases among all ED visits, as well as the triggers and management of anaphylaxis between two Canadian pediatric EDs (PEDs). As part of the Cross-Canada Anaphylaxis Registry (C-CARE), children presenting to the British Columbia Children's Hospital (BCCH) and Montreal Children's Hospital (MCH) EDs with anaphylaxis were recruited. Characteristics, triggers, and management of anaphylaxis were documented using a standardized data entry form. Differences in demographics, triggers, and management were determined by comparing the difference of proportions and 95% confidence interval. Between June 2014 and June 2016, there were 346 visits due to anaphylaxis among 93,730 PED visits at the BCCH ED and 631 anaphylaxis visits among 164,669 pediatric visits at the MCH ED. In both centers, the majority of cases were triggered by food (BCCH 91.3% [88.7, 94.0], MCH 82.4% [79.7, 85.3]), of which peanuts were the most common culprit (24.7% [20.9, 29.9] and 19.0% [15.8, 22.7], respectively). Pre-hospital administration of epinephrine (BCCH 27.7% [23.2, 32.8], MCH 33.1% [29.5, 37.0]) and antihistamines (BCCH 50.6% [45.2, 56.0], MCH 47.1% [43.1, 51.0]) was similar. In-hospital management differed in terms of increased epinephrine, antihistamine, and steroid use at the BCCH (59.2% [53.9, 64.4], 59.8% [54.4, 65.0], and 60.1% [54.7, 65.3], respectively) compared to the MCH (42.2% [38.3, 46.2], 36.2% [32.5, 40.1], and 11.9% [9.5, 14.8], respectively). Despite differences in management, percentage of cases admitted to the intensive care unit was similar between the two centers. Compared to previous European and North American reports, there is a high percentage of anaphylaxis cases in two PEDs across Canada with substantial differences in hospital management practices. It is crucial to develop training programs that aim to increase epinephrine use in anaphylaxis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 4 16%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Other 8 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 48%
Unspecified 6 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 2 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2017.
All research outputs
#3,796,559
of 8,968,121 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Asthma and Allergy
#55
of 117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,458
of 308,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Asthma and Allergy
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,968,121 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 57th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 117 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.