The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2,059 of the 2,094 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 407 of the 1,778 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR). METHODS: Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus. RESULTS: The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR. CONCLUSION: This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understanding.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
648 No full text of the sources · 182 No basis given · 159 Own interpretation · 158 Partly supported · 89 Supported · 81 Own method · 67 Supported so far · 60 Not checked yet · 27 Sources not found · 22 Own result · 14 Couldn’t confirm · 6 Not supported · 1 Mixed support · accuracy not yet measured
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“The prevalence of “food-induced rhinitis” seems to be under 1%.157”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [157] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion calls gustatory rhinitis a common phenomenon affecting a large portion of the population, contrary to a prevalence under 1%. The Food questionnaire section reports that hot chili peppers caused rhinorrhea in more than 60% of its 60 respondents; this is not a population-wide prevalence estimate, but it further contradicts the claimed figure. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“In both groups, 11% of individuals had a positive nasal challenge with Timothy grass.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [856] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Nasal challenge section reports positive challenge results in 44% of group I and 42% of group III, not 11% in each. Table II gives 11% for each group only after a further assessment classified which challenge reactions indicated allergy; the citing sentence conflates that classification with a positive nasal challenge. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plainn = 28- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
Some cited sources support this claim and some don’t — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Modern SPT of aeroallergens can be up to 25% more sensitive than sIgE serology depending on the patient population and the methodologies employed.793,930-934”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [793] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [930] source
- Disputedcites [931] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussion (pages not available) report the opposite comparison in the children studied: SPT alone would have missed an average of 42% of sensitizations, versus 13% with sIgE serology alone. The paper finds discordance between the tests, but does not report SPT as up to 25% more sensitive. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [932] source
- Partly supportedcites [933] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Environmental and occupational disorders section says latex skin prick testing was more sensitive than serum-specific IgE assays for detecting natural rubber latex allergy in health care workers. The Study design section mentions aeroallergen skin tests, but the serum IgE tests measured latex; the paper does not establish the claimed comparison for aeroallergens or the ‘up to 25%’ figure. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [934] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“No adverse events were reported, and there were no significant differences between outcome measures for both treatment arms.1729”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [1729] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section (AEs; page not provided) reports 11 adverse events in each treatment group, contrary to the claim that none were reported. The abstract says no *severe* adverse events occurred, which is a narrower finding. (LLM, conf=0.95)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“Despite improvement in asthma symptoms, objective measures using pulmonary function testing and peak expiratory flow have failed to demonstrate significant improvements.1804-1806”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1804] source
- Not matchedcites [1805]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Disputedcites [1806] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report statistically significant, though small, improvements in both morning and evening peak expiratory flow, contrary to the claim that peak expiratory flow failed to improve significantly. The FEV1 result was not statistically significant, and the Discussion says symptom scores could not be combined in the meta-analysis. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“A large population-based survey of AR patients demonstrated a strong correlation between AR disease severity and sleep disturbance.679”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Sleep disturbance and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [679] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Patient population section describes 63 carefully selected patients randomly allocated to vaccine or placebo, not a large population-based survey. Table III in the Discussion compares sleep-domain scores between treatment groups; it does not report a correlation between allergic rhinitis severity and sleep disturbance. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“The prevention and early identification of occupational rhinitis during medical surveillance of exposed workers and of young apprentices may provide an excellent opportunity to prevent the development of occupational asthma.110,111”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [110] source
The Abstract says rhinitis symptoms precede asthma and that early identification of rhinitis is crucial to preventing work-related asthma. The Understanding section recommends periodic medical surveillance during apprenticeship or work to detect occupational allergy and rhinitis early. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [111] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Neurogenic nasal inflammation is mediated by neuropeptides such as substance P, neurokinin A, and calcitonin gene-related peptide. These mediators are released by sensory nerve fibers in the nose and result in vasodilation, edema, and inflammation.133”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [133] source
The Neurogenic Inflammation section (p. 1) names substance P, neurokinin A, and calcitonin gene-related peptide in sensory neurons and says mediators released from sensory nerves produce vasodilation, edema, and other inflammation. The Chemical Irritant Receptors section (p. 2) specifically reports substance P release in the nose and links stimulation of nasal irritant receptors to neurogenic inflammation. (LLM, conf=0.89)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Chemicals known to cause sensitization of the respiratory tract include diisocyanates, acid anhydrides, some platinum salts, reactive dyes, glutaraldehyde, plicatic acid, and chroamine.118-120”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [118] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [119] source
- Partly supportedcites [120] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results tables list diisocyanates, several anhydrides, platinum salts, reactive dyes, glutaraldehyde, and chloramine T as occupational-asthma agents or inhalation sensitizers. Our copy does not identify plicatic acid or an agent named “chroamine”; the latter may be a misspelling of chloramine, but the paper does not establish that equivalence. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Pharmacologic treatment does not differ from that of non-occupational rhinitis.101”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [101] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.3.2 describes occupational rhinitis, and the Pharmacotherapy section discusses treatment of allergic rhinitis generally. Neither passage compares pharmacologic treatment for occupational and non-occupational rhinitis; searches for that comparison found no such statement in the available copy. (LLM, conf=0.68)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
- It may state two separate claims as one. 539
- Probably not a substantial claim. 227
- The quote only partly states this claim. 12
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“One RCT that examined monotherapy vs poly-therapy showed that the combination of mometasone with either levocetirizine or montelukast led to greater symptom and QOL improvement than mometasone alone, but there was no difference between the levocetirizine and montelukast groups.672”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [672] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 1 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Disputed
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“If the authors felt as though a non-English study should be included in the review, it was instructed that the paper be appropriately translated to minimize the risk of missing important data during the development of recommendations.4”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the PRISMA Checklist’s Methods section (page unavailable), the paper says that including or excluding non-English literature can influence meta-analysis estimates. Its Results section gives an example of studies excluded because they could not feasibly be translated. Neither passage instructs reviewers to translate included non-English studies to avoid missing important data. (LLM, conf=0.76)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Each topic author received specific instructions to perform a systematic review for the topic literature using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standardized guidelines.4”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [4] source
The Development of PRISMA section describes the PRISMA checklist and flow diagram for reporting systematic reviews. The citation identifies the guidelines the citing authors say they gave their topic authors; it is not evidence that those instructions were issued. The Scope of PRISMA section clarifies that PRISMA addresses reporting, not the conduct of a review. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Environmental tobacco smoke exposure is associated with chronic rhinitis and in some cases, AR.124,125”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [124] source
- Partly supportedcites [125] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The section ‘The Relationship of Second-hand Smoke and Rhinosinusitis’ (page unavailable) reports an association between secondhand smoke exposure and chronic rhinosinusitis. It does not establish the claimed association with chronic rhinitis or allergic rhinitis; those are different conditions. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“It is possible that these findings may be due to the inability to synthesize appropriate in vitro conjugates for diagnostic assays to detect serum IgE that binds these chemicals.122,123”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [122] source
- Supportedcites [123] source
The Introduction (page unavailable) says IgE detection depends on the isocyanate–albumin conjugate used as the assay antigen: conjugates used in most studies before 2004 were less sensitive than newer vapor-exposed conjugates. That supports the proposed explanation that an unsuitable in-vitro conjugate could leave isocyanate-specific IgE undetected; the paper does not claim this explains every negative result. (LLM, conf=0.85)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Viral rhinitis typically manifests in an acute form, and accounts for up to 98% of infectious rhinitis in the young child.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [136] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Definition and Diagnosis section describes the viral common cold as acute, with symptoms typically peaking by day 3. The Introduction says bacterial rhinosinusitis complicates 0.5%–2% of upper respiratory tract infections, but it does not say that viral rhinitis accounts for up to 98% of infectious rhinitis in young children; that percentage concerns a different condition and population. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“The incidence of viral rhinitis in young children is 6 episodes per patient-year.136”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [136] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction gives incidence figures for rhinosinusitis, and the ABRS Definition and Diagnosis section discusses annual episodes of bacterial rhinosinusitis. Neither gives an incidence of viral rhinitis in young children. Searches for young children, six episodes per year, and six episodes per patient-year found no passage establishing the claimed rate. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In a prospective study, patients were defined as demonstrating reactivity if nasal resistance on acoustic rhinometry increased by over 35% in response to tobacco smoke. Patients with less than 5% increase in nasal resistance were defined as nonreactive.131”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [131] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Materials and Methods (p. 1) gives the cited thresholds: a greater than 35% increase in nasal resistance after sidestream smoke was classified as a congestive response, and a less than 5% increase as nonresponsive. The paper does not say those resistance thresholds were measured by acoustic rhinometry; its protocol lists acoustic rhinometry and posterior rhinomanometry separately (Materials and Methods, p. 2). The subjects were healthy nonsmoking volunteers, not patients. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In several studies, self-reported symptoms tend to be elicited by exposure to smoke and can correlate with serum cotinine levels.126-128”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [126] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports associations between second-hand smoke exposure and respiratory symptoms and says smoking may increase the risk of chronic rhinitis. It does not establish that symptoms were elicited by smoke exposure, and the paper does not report a correlation with serum cotinine; its blood testing measured allergen-specific IgE (Definitions; page unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Partly supportedcites [127] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion’s “Risk factors” section reports an association between environmental tobacco smoke exposure and rhinitis symptoms without atopy. The study does not establish that smoke elicited the symptoms, and its Methods and Definitions sections describe reported exposure rather than serum cotinine measurements; the cotinine correlation is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [128] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that the highest serum cotinine tertile among active smokers was associated with greater odds of self-reported rhinitis. They found no significant association for secondhand smoke exposure, and the Discussion says the cross-sectional study cannot establish that smoke exposure elicited the symptoms. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In contrast to AR, smoke-induced rhinitis is likely multi-factorial, and other mechanisms such as neurogenic or irritant etiologies play a more predominant role.131,132”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [131] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (p. 4) describes irritant effects on nasal mucociliary clearance and suggests that activation of chemosensitive nerves could explain one observed response to smoke. It does not establish that smoke-induced rhinitis is multifactorial or that neurogenic and irritant mechanisms predominate more than they do in allergic rhinitis; the Discussion (p. 5) says the relationship between clearance responses and rhinitis symptoms remains to be assessed. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [132] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“but the basis for this predilection is not well understood.168-170”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [168] source
- Could not verifycites [169] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (page unavailable) report that women with persistent rhinitis described more severe symptoms and psychosocial effects than men. Our copy does not address female predilection for alcohol-induced nasal symptoms or whether its basis is understood (searched: alcohol-induced nasal symptoms, alcohol, drinking, and sex differences). (LLM, conf=0.74)
- Could not verifycites [170] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction discusses sex differences in blood-alcohol levels and alcohol-related harm, while the Discussion and Results address drinking patterns and AUDIT scores. Searches for female predilection and alcohol-induced nasal symptoms found no passage about nasal symptoms or why they might be more common in women. (LLM, conf=0.74)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Vasomotor rhinitis is the most common cause of NAR, and is found in 71% of cases.189-191”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [189] source
The Abstract states that vasomotor rhinitis is the most common form of nonallergic rhinitis and comprises approximately 71% of its conditions. The Results table reports 71% (136/191) across the studies summarized, supporting the cited percentage as an estimate. (LLM, conf=0.95)
- Supportedcites [190] source
The Results (p. 124–125) classify 52 patients as having vasomotor rhinitis and 21 as having eosinophilic nonallergic rhinitis. Vasomotor rhinitis was therefore the larger group and accounted for 52 of the 73 clearly nonallergic cases, or approximately 71%. This percentage describes the study's patients. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not matchedcites [191]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, it is known that α and β receptors become less sensitive and autonomic function declines with age, which leads to an imbalance of sympathetic and parasympathetic tone.202-204”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [202] source
- Partly supportedcites [203] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Conclusion reports that autonomic function, including sympathetic and parasympathetic responses, declines with increasing age. The Introduction mentions autonomic imbalance across age groups, but our copy does not say that α and β receptors become less sensitive or establish the claimed causal chain from receptor sensitivity and declining function to an imbalance of sympathetic and parasympathetic tone. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [204] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Although there is overlap between age-related rhinitis and AR in the elderly in terms of symptoms and recommended treatment with INCS,210,216 the underlying physiologic process of each is quite different.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [210] source
Section 3 describes allergic rhinitis as IgE-mediated nasal inflammation and says its symptoms can be indistinguishable from non-allergic rhinitis in seniors. Section 2.1 instead describes age-related nasal changes, while section 5.1 says intranasal corticosteroids are used for both allergic and non-allergic rhinitis. Together, these passages support symptom and treatment overlap despite different underlying processes. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [216] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Vasomotor rhinitis/non-allergic rhinopathy is the most common type of NAR,205 and the highest prevalence of NAR is seen in the elderly.144,189,200,207”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [144] source
- Supportedcites [189] source
The Conclusions state that vasomotor rhinitis is by far the most common subtype of nonallergic rhinitis, supporting the clause cited to this paper. The elderly-prevalence clause has separate citations and is not attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Partly supportedcites [200] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation to this source is attached to the elderly-prevalence clause, not the preceding claim about vasomotor rhinitis. The Epidemiology section (page unavailable) says diagnoses of nonallergic rhinitis increase with age and that more than 60% of rhinitis patients over 50 have a nonallergic cause. It does not establish that population prevalence is highest in the elderly. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, it has been shown that aging does not reduce the prevalence of AR and that AR in the elderly is likely underdiagnosed, so AR should be considered when diagnosing new-onset nasal symptoms in the elderly population.210”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [210] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Conclusions say allergic rhinitis occurs more often in older people than commonly believed, and the Diagnosis section describes how clinicians may overlook it. But the Introduction explicitly says its prevalence decreases with age, contrary to that part of the claim. The paper supports considering allergic rhinitis during diagnosis, though it does not specifically discuss new-onset nasal symptoms. (LLM, conf=0.86)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“AR is a type I IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reaction,217,218 whereas allergy and allergens do not play a role in the symptoms and physiologic changes of age-related rhinitis.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [217] source
The Clinical Problem passage defines allergic rhinitis as symptoms caused by IgE-mediated reactions to inhaled allergens. The citation is attached to that first clause; the separate statement about age-related rhinitis is not attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [218] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“While the exact pathophysiology of non-allergic rhinopathy remains incompletely described, neurosensory abnormalities are thought to play a crucial role.40”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [40] source
The Abstract (page not specified) describes the condition’s pathophysiology as unclear. It also says current information suggests nonallergic rhinopathy is probably due to neurosensory abnormalities, matching the citing sentence’s qualified wording. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The descriptive term “empty nose syndrome” (ENS) was originally coined in 1994 by Kern and Stenkvist to describe empty space in the region of the inferior and middle turbinates on coronal CT images of patients who had partial or total inferior and middle turbinectomies.219”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [219] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Factors that contribute to an increase in nasal obstruction/congestion in the aging nose include thicker mucus secondary to a decrease in body water content,208-210 nasal airflow obstruction secondary to structural changes caused by the loss of nasal cartilage elasticity and tip support,198,200,210 and mucus stasis secondary to less effective MCC.200,209”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [198] source
- Partly supportedcites [200] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Changes of the Aging Nose,” the Structural and Mucus subsections link age-related loss of nasal tip support to reduced airflow and dehydration to thick mucus. The Mucociliary Clearance subsection describes slower clearance and stasis of thick mucus. However, the paper links thick mucus and stasis chiefly to postnasal drip, cough, and globus; it does not specifically say they increase nasal obstruction or congestion. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not matchedcites [208]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [209] source
- Partly supportedcites [210] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.1, “Aging of the Nose” (page unavailable), reports frequent nasal congestion, dryness, decreased mucosal elasticity, weakened septal cartilage, and weakened mucociliary function with aging. It does not specify decreased body water content causing thicker mucus, loss of nasal tip support, or mucus stasis. In the printed sentence, this source is cited for the first two factors, not the mucus-stasis factor. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Thickened mucus and a less effective MCC system may also lead to postnasal drip, which is a common nasal complaint in the elderly population.200”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [200] source
The “Mucus” subsection of “Changes of the Aging Nose” says that thickened mucus together with decreased mucociliary clearance is thought to lead to common rhinitic complaints such as postnasal drip. The claim preserves that tentative causal language and the elderly-patient context. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Profiling the nasal transcriptome in GPA reveals unique gene expression signatures related to innate immunity, inflammatory cell chemotaxis, extracellular matrix composition, and epithelial barrier integrity that may eventually be used clinically.243,244”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [243] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Could not verifycites [244] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“ARS is defined as the sudden onset of sinonasal symptoms with associated sinonasal inflammation that lasts less than 4 weeks.1,137,138,266,267”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Partly supportedcites [137] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (p. 2) classifies ARS as lasting less than 4 weeks, supporting the duration. The guideline’s definition (p. 9) specifies purulent nasal drainage accompanied by nasal obstruction or facial pain-pressure-fullness; it does not define ARS by sudden onset or by associated sinonasal inflammation alone. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [266] source
- Supportedcites [267] source
The consensus research definitions section defines acute rhinosinusitis as inflammation of the paranasal sinuses and nasal passages lasting up to 4 weeks (28 days) and describes its presenting symptoms. The paper’s Causative factors section also describes acute inflammation as having signs or symptoms that appear over minutes to hours, consistent with the paraphrase’s ‘sudden onset.’ No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Rhinitis (75% of patients) is one of the initial manifestations of EGPA,248 in addition to CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), and partial/total smell loss.249”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [248] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The treatment discussion (p. 548) identifies rhinitis as a symptom in EGPA patients, supporting its association with the disease. It does not say rhinitis is an initial manifestation or occurs in 75% of patients. The nasal-polyps and smell-loss clause is attached to a different citation in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [249] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Symptomatically, these conditions are characterized by nasal obstruction, nasal congestion, facial pressure or pain, anterior or posterior nasal discharge, and anosmia/hyposmia for varying durations of time.1,138”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Supportedcites [138] source
Section 2.1 (Clinical definition of rhinosinusitis in adults; page not provided) lists nasal blockage or congestion, anterior or posterior discharge, facial pain or pressure, and reduced or lost smell. It specifies that two or more symptoms are required, not that every listed symptom must be present. The paper distinguishes acute from chronic rhinosinusitis, consistent with symptoms occurring for varying durations. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Therapy with corticosteroids, immunomodulators (prasterone, vitamin D, hydroxychloroquine), or immunosuppressants (azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, or mycophenolate) is prescribed for symptom control,238,262 while belimumab is a recent biological (anti-BAFF [B-cell activating factor] monoclonal antibody) to potentially treat SLE.263”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [238] source
- Partly supportedcites [262] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction identifies corticosteroids as controlling inflammation and names azathioprine and mycophenolate as immunosuppressives used in SLE management. It also identifies hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D and dehydroepiandrosterone (prasterone) as immunomodulating strategies. The passages found do not identify cyclophosphamide as an SLE treatment, so the full list is not supported by this copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Anti-IL-5 therapy (mepolizumab) is a potential biological treatment offering clinical benefit and stability and reducing corticosteroid needs.252”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [252] source
The Abstract reports that mepolizumab is an anti-IL-5 antibody and that, in seven patients with Churg-Strauss syndrome (EGPA), it enabled corticosteroid tapering while maintaining clinical stability. The Discussion describes the reduced steroid dose and clinical benefit during treatment. The claim's wording as a potential treatment is consistent with this pilot-study evidence. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Nasal discharge is often purulent and may be discolored, with a tendency to be unilateral although may be bilateral.1,138”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Partly supportedcites [138] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Sections 2.1 and 2.2 (page not available in our copy) identify nasal discharge as a rhinosinusitis symptom and mucopurulent discharge as a possible endoscopic sign. They do not say that discharge in acute rhinosinusitis is often purulent, may be discolored, or tends to be unilateral rather than bilateral. (LLM, conf=0.83)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“CRS is an inflammatory condition of the sinonasal cavity persisting for more than 12 weeks with at least 2 symptoms of nasal obstruction and congestion, mucopurulent nasal drainage (anterior or posterior), facial pressure or pain, and anosmia/hyposmia.1,137,138,266,267”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Supportedcites [137] source
The Definition (p. 21) specifies at least two of the listed symptoms lasting 12 weeks or longer, together with documented inflammation. The Introduction (p. 2) describes CRS as lasting more than 12 weeks, and CRS with and without Polyps (p. 20) calls it primarily an inflammatory disease. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [266] source
- Partly supportedcites [267] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The consensus research definitions section describes CRS as inflammation lasting beyond 12 weeks and lists the same symptoms, with two or more making CRS strongly suspected. It does not treat those symptoms alone as an established diagnosis: objective documentation is required, and the paper notes that CRS can occasionally be diagnosed from incidental imaging findings without symptoms. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Comparatively, AR is characterized by nasal obstruction, nasal congestion, clear watery rhinorrhea (anterior or posterior), and allergic symptoms.264,265”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [264] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Diagnosis of AR sections (page not supplied) identify watery rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, itching, and sneezing as characteristic symptoms; the diagnosis section also refers to a history of allergic symptoms. The paper does not specify that watery rhinorrhea may be anterior or posterior, so that detail is not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [265] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) statement, fever and elevated serum markers of inflammation (C-reactive protein or erythrocyte sedimentation rate) are also included as diagnostic criteria.138”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [138] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The clinical definitions in §§2.1–2.2 (page numbers unavailable) list symptoms, endoscopic signs, and CT changes, but do not address fever or elevated CRP or ESR as ARS diagnostic criteria. Searches for fever, CRP, ESR, and inflammatory markers found no passage in our copy establishing the attributed criteria. (LLM, conf=0.74)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The early reaction occurs immediately after exposure and is characterized by sneezing, nasal and ocular itching and rhinorrhea, which typically resolves within 30 minutes.264”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [264] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “Early and late reactions” section says that sneezing and rhinorrhea develop and disappear within 30 minutes of allergen exposure. The Introduction identifies nasal itching as an allergic-rhinitis symptom, but the paper does not specifically assign nasal or ocular itching to the early reaction, or say that the reaction begins immediately. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“A prolonged duration of symptoms (greater than 12 weeks) should raise suspicions for CRS and prompt further investigation.1,137,138”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Supportedcites [137] source
The Introduction (p. 2) classifies rhinosinusitis lasting more than 12 weeks as chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). The CRS section (p. 20) says persistent symptoms are sensitive but not specific for CRS and that diagnosis requires documented inflammation, supporting further investigation rather than diagnosis from duration alone. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Moderate to severe facial pain and/or fever would also be atypical for isolated AR and may indicate the presence of an episode of ARS or an acute exacerbation of CRS, differentiated by duration and chronicity of symptoms.1,137,138”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Partly supportedcites [137] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (p. 2) distinguishes ARS from CRS by duration and notes that CRS can have acute exacerbations; the CRS section (p. 20) lists fever and describes episodic infections. The Cardinal Symptoms section (p. 6) includes facial pain in ARS, but requires accompanying purulent nasal drainage. The guideline does not state that moderate-to-severe facial pain or fever is atypical of isolated allergic rhinitis, so that part is not supported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Facial pressure and pain is described as moderate to severe.137”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [137] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Cardinal Symptoms of Acute Rhinosinusitis section (p. 6) identifies facial pain-pressure-fullness as a symptom of ARS. The Choice of Initial Antibiotic section (p. 17) mentions moderate-to-severe ABRS symptoms, but does not describe facial pressure or pain specifically as moderate to severe. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The late reaction takes place up to 6 hours after exposure and is characterized by nasal obstruction and congestion.264”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [264] source
The “Early and late reactions” section says the late reaction shows nasal obstruction approximately 6 hours after allergen exposure. Nasal congestion is a paraphrase of obstruction here. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Symptoms include nasal congestion, nasal obstruction or nasal discharge, and facial pressure or pain, or anosmia/hyposmia.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Partly supportedcites [137] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Cardinal Symptoms section (p. 6) supports nasal obstruction and facial pain or pressure, while the Definition (p. 9) treats congestion as another description of obstruction and lists anosmia and hyposmia as additional symptoms of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis. The claim omits an important qualification: the guideline defines acute rhinosinusitis by purulent, not just any, nasal drainage accompanied by obstruction or facial pain or pressure. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [266] source
- Supportedcites [267] source
The Rhinosinusitis consensus definitions section lists nasal drainage, nasal obstruction, facial pain or pressure, and possible hyposmia among symptoms of acute rhinosinusitis. Table IX in Symptoms assessments also lists facial congestion and hyposmia–anosmia as rhinosinusitis symptoms. The claim describes symptoms, not criteria sufficient for diagnosis. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In comparison, while AR symptoms are variable in duration, they tend to have seasonal or exposure-related fluctuations.1,137,138”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Could not verifycites [137] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (p. 2) describes the duration of rhinosinusitis, not allergic rhinitis. Testing for Allergy (p. 26) discusses allergic rhinitis in relation to sinusitis but does not describe its symptom duration or seasonal or exposure-related fluctuations. Searches for those patterns found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Superimposed late reactions may blunt the manifestation of acute phase symptoms and make the diagnosis of AR less obvious.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [264] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The 'Early and late reactions' section distinguishes early sneezing and rhinorrhea from later nasal obstruction, and 'Diagnosis of AR' describes symptom-based diagnosis. Neither section says that late reactions blunt early symptoms or make AR harder to diagnose; searches for that relationship found no supporting passage. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.70)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“AR symptoms are present for at least 1 hour on most symptomatic days; however, patients may have symptom-free intervals.264,265”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [264] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Diagnosis of AR section says that AR is strongly suspected when two or more specified symptoms persist for at least one hour on most days; it presents this as a diagnostic indicator, not a rule for all AR symptoms on most symptomatic days. The ARIA Classification section supports symptom-free intervals, noting that perennial AR symptoms do not persist throughout the year. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [265] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A history of allergic symptoms or allergen exposure-related symptoms support a possible diagnosis of AR, as these are not associated with rhinosinusitis and AR may or may not be seasonal in nature, which can also be elicited by history.264,265”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [264] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Diagnosis of AR section says a typical history of allergic symptoms supports suspicion of AR, and the ARIA Classification section describes both seasonal and perennial patterns. The claimed distinction from rhinosinusitis is not supported: the Rhinosinusitis section describes possible overlap and reports AR patients with acute rhinosinusitis. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [265] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The timing of symptoms may also help delineate between rhinosinusitis and AR as ARS symptoms typically last days to weeks (but no more than 4 weeks), CRS symptoms persist daily for greater than 12 weeks.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Partly supportedcites [137] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (p. 2) defines ARS as lasting up to 4 weeks and CRS as lasting more than 12 weeks; the CRS section (p. 20) also describes symptoms persisting beyond 12 weeks. The guideline does not specify that CRS symptoms must occur daily, so that added qualifier is not supported. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“RARS is defined as at least 4 episodes of ARS per year, with disease-free intervals between episodes.1,137,138,266,268”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Partly supportedcites [137] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (p. 2) describes recurrent ARS as four or more annual episodes of rhinosinusitis without persistent symptoms between them. The Recurrent Acute Rhinosinusitis section (p. 21) specifies a narrower diagnostic requirement: each episode must meet the criteria for acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS), not merely ARS. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [266] source
- Could not verifycites [268] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The ‘Visits Attributable to Acute Sinusitis’ section (page unavailable) defines visits using an acute-sinusitis diagnosis code and reports annual visit rates, not a definition of recurrent acute rhinosinusitis. Searches for RARS, four episodes per year, and disease-free intervals found no passage addressing that definition. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“CRS is divided into 2 main phenotypic groups: CRSwNP and CRSsNP.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Supportedcites [137] source
The Supporting Text (p. 20) describes CRS with and without polyps as distinct clinical entities. Statement 10 (p. 26) also directs clinicians to confirm whether nasal polyps are present in a patient with CRS. These passages support the two-group distinction in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [266] source
- Supportedcites [267] source
In “How should we subclassify CRS?”, the paper reports a consensus in favor of subclassifying CRS as CRSsNP and CRSwNP. The “Consensus classification scheme for CRS” also states that the minimal clinical classification is either CRSsNP or CRSwNP. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In addition, patients must have objective evidence of sinonasal inflammation on either nasal endoscopy (polyps, edema, mucopurulent rhinorrhea) or on CT scans of the sinuses.137,138,266,267”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [137] source
The Supporting Text (p. 22) says a CRS diagnosis requires objective evidence of sinonasal inflammation. The Definition (p. 21) lists purulent mucus, edema, polyps, or imaging evidence; the endoscopy and CT sections (p. 23) describe the cited ways to obtain it. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not matchedcites [138]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [266] source
- Partly supportedcites [267] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The consensus research definitions (page not provided) require objective evidence of CRS, including endoscopic findings such as polyps, discolored mucus, or edema. But they require a positive sinus CT as well as examination—not either one alone. The patient-care definitions (page not provided) say CT is not essential for clinical diagnosis and can establish it independently of examination only rarely. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The adaptive immune response can be broadly classified into 2 categories based upon the predominant Th lymphocyte subtype.274”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [274] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction says an immune response can become predominantly Th1-like or Th2-like after prolonged immunization, supporting classification by predominant helper-T-cell subtype in that setting. But it also identifies Th17-type responses and says Th1 and Th2 often participate together, so it does not support broadly dividing all adaptive immune responses into only two categories. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This results in an increased production of immunomodulatory cytokines and chemical mediators, forming an important positive-feedback amplification loop involving the IgE-IgE receptor cascade, thus perpetuating ongoing inflammation.285,286”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [285]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [286] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes IgE–FcεRI binding as triggering release of cytokines and chemical mediators, and the Results report that IL-4 increases FcεRI expression. The Discussion suggests that nasal mast cells amplify IgE synthesis and thereby perpetuate chronic allergic inflammation. The paper thus supports the proposed amplification mechanism, but does not establish the positive-feedback loop or increased chemical-mediator production as demonstrated outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“While it is possible for a positive allergy skin or in vitro test result to lack clinical relevance, the opposite is also true, as a negative allergy skin or in vitro test result does not exclude regional IgE-mediated sensitivity, as in the case of LAR.194,288-290”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [194] source
- Supportedcites [288] source
The “Local IgE in rhinitis” section says positive skin-prick or serum specific-IgE tests indicate sensitization but do not establish an allergic response in the target organ; it also notes that some people test positive without clinical allergy. The “Nonbiopsy biomarkers for LAR” section says classification based on those tests can misdiagnose patients who are later identified as having local allergic rhinitis (LAR). (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites [289] source
The Skin prick test (SPT) section says a positive result does not always imply clinically relevant sensitization. The Detection of allergen-specific IgE section says some patients may have a local IgE response without systemic IgE and reports specific IgE in the nasal mucosa of a subset of patients, supporting the point that negative systemic testing need not exclude local sensitivity. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not matchedcites [290]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Allergens are then engulfed by dendritic cells, which migrate to lymphoid organs where the antigen is presented to naive helper T (Th0) cells on MHC class II molecules.274”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [274] source
The Introduction describes uptake of environmental proteins such as pollens and venoms for MHC class II presentation. It also describes antigen-carrying cells entering lymph nodes from peripheral tissues, dendritic cells presenting antigen to T cells there, and class II presentation to CD4+ helper T cells. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“LAR is a regional inflammatory condition defined by local symptoms and sIgE-mediated inflammation without evidence of systemic hypersensitivity.107,194,284,288”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [107] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [194] source
- Supportedcites [284] source
The Introduction describes rhinitis symptoms with a localized nasal inflammatory infiltrate containing IgE-positive cells, mast cells and eosinophils despite negative tests for atopy. The Conclusion describes this as nasal mucosal allergic disease without a positive skin-prick test or serum IgE to the same allergen, matching the claim’s distinction between local allergy and systemic hypersensitivity. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites [288] source
The “LAR vs NAR: two different rhinitis phenotypes” section defines LAR by rhinitis symptoms and a localized allergic response in the nasal mucosa, without atopy on skin-prick or serum sIgE testing. It also describes nasal Th2 inflammation and local sIgE production, supporting the claim’s distinction between local inflammation and systemic hypersensitivity. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“TSLP causes maturation of dendritic cells into Th2-promoting subtypes,277 which secrete chemokines that attract Th2-destined T lymphocytes, foster clonal amplification of Th2 cells, and enhance survival of memory B-cells.272”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [277] source
Citation 277 is attached to the first clause, about TSLP maturing dendritic cells that promote Th2 responses. The Conclusion and future perspective section states that TSLP induces dendritic-cell maturation and OX40L expression, enabling those cells to drive inflammatory Th2 differentiation. The later claims about chemokines, clonal amplification, and memory B cells carry a different citation and are not attributed to this source here. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [272] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The respiratory airway mucosa is a site of IgE production during allergic inflammation, as has been demonstrated in patients with AR309-312 and LAR,299-301,303-307 with both somatic hypermutation and class switching occurring in the nasal mucosa.309,312-315”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [309] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [310] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [311] source
- Partly supportedcites [312] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports direct evidence of local class switching to IgE in the nasal mucosa of patients with allergic rhinitis and states that IgE is synthesized there. It discusses somatic hypermutation as generally accompanying class switching and cites a separate study of local hypermutation, but does not itself demonstrate that process in the nasal mucosa. The paper addresses allergic rhinitis, not LAR; the citing sentence assigns LAR to a separate group of citations. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [299] source
- Supportedcites [300] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion describes local IgE production in nasal mucosa in allergic and idiopathic rhinitis, and the Results report nasal allergen-specific IgE in some patients with seasonal idiopathic rhinitis despite negative systemic allergy tests. This supports the LAR portion to which this paper is cited. The separate statement about somatic hypermutation and class switching carries different citations in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [301] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [303] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [304] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [305] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The rate of local IgE production316 is sufficient to saturate IgE receptors on local mast cells, and potentially spill over into the circulation.316,317”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [316]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [317] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The 'When' section says locally produced IgE binds receptors on airway mucosal cells, including mast cells. The 'Where' section discusses possible spillover of mucosally produced IgE into the circulation. Neither passage establishes that the rate of production is sufficient to saturate mast-cell receptors; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Upon exposure to environmental antigens, including viruses and allergens, airway epithelial cells rapidly release the cytokines IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP which directly activate ILC2s that then produce the prototypical type 2 cytokines IL-5 and IL-13.331”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [331] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “Sources of ILC2 Activation” section identifies IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP as epithelial-cell-derived activators of ILC2s and reports that activated ILC2s produce IL-5 and IL-13. The sections on TSLP and on allergen- and virus-induced responses connect these pathways to allergens and infections. The copy does not establish that epithelial cells rapidly release all three cytokines upon either type of exposure; no page numbers are available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“These mediators affect recruitment of inflammatory cells to local tissues and create a microenvironment that affects the function of immune cells, thereby propagating local inflammatory processes.325”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [325] source
The Discussion (page not provided) says that mediators released after TLR3 activation contribute to the recruitment and activation of neutrophils and macrophages, and that IL-8 and RANTES are involved in eosinophil recruitment and survival. The Background (page not provided) also describes epithelial TLR signaling as shaping tissue-resident dendritic-cell function, supporting the claim’s broader description of a local environment that affects immune responses. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Immunologic studies have revealed the existence of a Th2 inflammatory response in the nasal mucosa of LAR patients,177,299-301 with positive response to NPT,291,300-302 and local production of sIgE177,290,299-301,303-305 and inflammatory mediators.304,306,307”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [177] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussion (pages unavailable) report increased IgE-positive cells, mast cells, and eosinophils in idiopathic rhinitis and suggest a localized Th2-type response. The study did not establish that these patients had LAR through a positive nasal provocation test, nor did it demonstrate local production of allergen-specific IgE; its Th2 conclusion is also more tentative than the citing sentence suggests. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [299] source
- Partly supportedcites [300] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and Discussion (pages not provided) report positive nasal allergen provocation in a subgroup of seasonal idiopathic-rhinitis patients, nasal specific IgE in some of those patients, and increased nasal inflammatory cells and eosinophil cationic protein. They do not establish that the response is specifically Th2, and detection of nasal specific IgE does not by itself demonstrate local production in every patient. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [301] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [291] source
- Not matchedcites [302]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [290]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [303] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [304] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [305] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Recent data provide additional evidence that epithelial barrier dysfunction contributes to the development of inflammatory diseases such as AR, but it remains to be elucidated to what extent primary (genetic) vs secondary (inflammatory) mechanisms drive this breakdown.322”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [322] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Allergen challenge in AR subjects induces an increased number of peripheral serum ILC2s332,333; however, a similar increase in the nasal mucosa is yet to be demonstrated.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [332] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s results (section labeled Abstract; page not provided) report that the percentage of peripheral blood ILC2s increased four hours after nasal cat-allergen challenge in subjects with allergic rhinitis. The discussion says an increase in nasal-mucosa ILC2s remains to be investigated. It measured blood cells, not serum ILC2s, and reports a percentage rather than an absolute cell count. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [333] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the paper’s main text (page unavailable), the authors report increased peripheral-blood ILC2s during natural grass-pollen exposure in seasonal allergic rhinitis and note a prior finding after experimental nasal allergen challenge. The cited paper did not itself conduct an allergen challenge, and it measured cells in blood, not serum. The nasal-mucosa clause follows the citations and is not attributed to this source here. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“The upper and lower airways are linked from anatomical, histological, and immunological perspectives with inflammation in one part of the airways influencing the other part, thus forming a united airway system.336”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [336] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results discuss how often systematic reviews cover asthma and allergic rhinitis, and the Discussion describes the scope of the overview. Neither addresses anatomical, histological, or immunological links between the upper and lower airways or inflammation passing between them (searched: united airway, upper and lower airways, and rhinitis–asthma inflammation). (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Type 2 ILCs are found in AR, where they closely interact with epithelial and other cells controlling the mucosal environment.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [375] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section (“NH Cells Contribute to Protease-Mediated Eosinophilia”; page unavailable) identifies lung natural helper cells as ILC2s and describes their activation by IL-33 released from alveolar epithelial cells in a mouse airway-inflammation model. The paper mentions rhinitis in its Introduction as an allergic disorder, but it does not establish that ILC2s are found in allergic rhinitis or describe their interactions in the nasal mucosa. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Treg cells play a major role in allergen tolerance and allergen immunotherapy (AIT).371-373”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [371] source
- Partly supportedcites [372] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion says Treg-associated regulatory mechanisms may be important for allergen tolerance in the intermediate and gradual murine immunotherapy regimens. The results report increased Treg numbers in those regimens, but not in the rapid regimen; the paper also cautions that Treg responses do not always correlate with clinical benefit. It therefore supports a possible role, not the unqualified claim that Treg cells play a major role in allergen tolerance and AIT generally. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [373] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Both AR and asthma may also be characterized by hyperreactivity that is not correlated to the atopic state.192,340”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [192] source
- Partly supportedcites [340] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports increased bronchial hyperresponsiveness to methacholine in children with both atopic and non-atopic asthma, with no difference between the groups. It does not address allergic rhinitis (AR), and it finds greater responsiveness to AMP in atopic asthma, so the claim applies only to a specific measure of hyperreactivity in asthma. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The characterization of phenotypes of rhinitis and asthma are very similar, with emphasis on allergy and eosinophilia, non-allergic phenotypes in both upper and lower airways, and the link between CRS, especially with nasal polyps, and late onset asthma.319,338,339”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [319] source
- Partly supportedcites [338] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report increased incident asthma after CRS without nasal polyps, supporting a link between CRS and asthma. But the Results find no association between CRS with nasal polyps and subsequent asthma, and the Discussion says asthma precedes the onset of CRS with nasal polyps. The paper does not characterize rhinitis and asthma phenotypes as similar or establish the claimed emphasis on allergy, eosinophilia, and non-allergic phenotypes. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [339] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Fluticasone propionate has been found to increase expression of tight junction proteins zonula occludens 1 and occludin and a more intact nasal epithelial barrier.322”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Histologic and epithelial changes
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [322] source
The Results section (p. 7) reports that fluticasone propionate increased occludin and ZO-1 mRNA expression in cultured primary nasal epithelial cells. The paper also reports that it restored barrier function (p. 1); the expression finding is specifically from an in vitro experiment. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Degranulation of both mast cells381 and basophils occurs during the early and late phases of a type I reaction after allergen encounter and crosslinking of IgE molecules as well as upon stimulation by IL-33.382”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [381] source
Citation 381 is attached to “mast cells.” The Results report mast-cell degranulation after allergen provocation, supporting the mast-cell portion of the sentence. The later claims about basophils, late phases, and IL-33 are not attributed to this citation. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [382] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“IL-13 from mast cells plays a crucial role in mast cell–induced local IgE synthesis by B cells,286,395 which in turn upregulate FcεRI expression on mast cells.286”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cytokine network and soluble mediators
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [286] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that blocking IL-13 completely inhibited nasal mast cell–induced IgE synthesis in B cells, supporting the first clause. The Results and Abstract report a correlation between serum IgE and mast-cell FcεRI expression, but do not show that B-cell-produced IgE upregulates that receptor; the demonstrated upregulator was IL-4. Passage page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [395] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Nasal epithelium is thicker in patients with AR after allergen challenge,415,416 but studies on epithelial thickness in AR without allergen challenge are conflicting.415-417”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Histologic and epithelial changes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [415] source
- Could not verifycites [416] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Cell count section measures epithelial integrity as the length of intact epithelium, not epithelial thickness. The Discussion describes conflicting reports of epithelial shedding, but not conflicting measurements of thickness. Our copy therefore does not establish either thickness claim, including the claim about allergen challenge. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Partly supportedcites [417] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (page not available in our copy) report thicker nasal epithelium in perennial rhinitis than in seasonal rhinitis during pollen season, but the difference from healthy volunteers was not statistically significant. This supports a qualified finding about thickness without deliberate challenge. The Discussion (page not available) mentions no reduction in thickness 24 hours after allergen provocation; it does not report thickening after challenge. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Further, TSLP has been shown to activate dendritic cells, promote Th2 responses, and activate mast cells.401”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cytokine network and soluble mediators
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [401] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The background section states that TSLP activates dendritic cells and promotes DC-mediated Th2 responses. The Discussion reports that TSLP stimulates Th2 cytokine production by human mast cells, but specifies that this occurs synergistically with IL-1 and TNF-α; it does not establish unqualified mast-cell activation by TSLP alone. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A higher prevalence of these responses is seen in people living in “English-speaking” countries (eg, UK, Australia, New Zealand), a lower prevalence in Eastern Europe than in Western Europe, and a diagnosis of AR is more frequently seen in countries with higher asthma rates and sensitization to seasonal allergens.455,475”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, Bauchau and Durham9 diagnosed Belgian patients via serological IgE testing after a positive telephone screen and reported that Belgium had an AR prevalence of 28.5% (the highest of the European countries evaluated).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Step one: telephone interviews says people with a positive screen were invited for clinical examination. Step two: clinical diagnosis says that examination included blood IgE testing, but local investigators made diagnoses according to their usual practice—not by IgE testing alone. Step two: clinical examinations reports Belgium as highest at 29% (rounded); the passages do not state the claimed 28.5% exactly. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“From 1 to 5 years of age, the annual incidence was between 3.6% and 4.5%, with the highest incidence between 2 and 3 years of age.467”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Incidence and prevalence of allergic rhinitis in children
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [467] source
Table 2 in Results > Age at diagnosis and overall incidence gives rhinitis incidence in six-month age groups. Adding each pair from 12–59 months yields annual rates of 3.7%, 4.5%, 4.2%, and 3.6%; the highest is at 24–35 months, between ages 2 and 3. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“There have been major international efforts to compare variations in the national prevalence of AR using standardized methods (ie, ECRHS and ISAAC). These studies show marked geographic variation of “hay fever or nasal allergies” (adults) or “a problem with sneezing, or a runny, or a blocked nose when you DID NOT have a cold or the flu that was accompanied by itchy-watery eyes?” (children).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [455] source
- Partly supportedcites [475] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The introduction reports international variation in childhood rhinitis and describes ISAAC Phase Two as a comparison using a common protocol. Materials and Methods gives the standardized questions about nasal symptoms without a cold and accompanying itchy-watery eyes. The paper does not report ECRHS findings or geographic variation in adults’ “hay fever or nasal allergies,” so the adult portion is unsupported. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, this increased environmental exposure has been shown to affect development of AR and patient symptoms of atopic nasal diseases.481,482”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [481] source
- Supportedcites [482] source
The passage labeled Abstract states that environmental exposure to pollen can directly affect symptoms of allergic respiratory disease, including allergic rhinitis, and the initial development of those diseases. This supports the attributed claim; no page number is provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“SNPs in leucine-rich repeat-containing protein 32 (LRRC32) have been strongly associated with AR in 3 of the GWASs,486-488 and with asthma,487,489 eczema,488,490 and other allergy-related comorbidities.486,489,491”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [486] source
In the citing sentence, this paper is cited for the asthma and allergy-related comorbidity associations, not for eczema or the count of three allergic-rhinitis GWASs. The Results report a genome-wide significant LRRC32 association with asthma with hay fever (P = 5 × 10−11), and the Abstract Results state that the variants were also associated with asthma and hay fever separately, though more weakly. (LLM, conf=0.89)
- Partly supportedcites [487] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the main text (page unavailable), the paper identifies LRRC32 as a locus where allergy and autoimmune disease share risk alleles. Its exploratory analysis examines rhinitis and asthma symptoms across allergy loci, but does not establish an LRRC32-specific association with rhinitis in three GWAS or with asthma and eczema individually. Those specifics are not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [488] source
- Supportedcites [489] source
The Findings report a genome-wide-significant association between asthma and a variant at 11q13.5 near LRRC32, and an association of that locus with atopic status among people with asthma. The Discussion also reports an association of a linked variant with atopic dermatitis. This source is cited for asthma and other allergy-related comorbidities, not for the sentence’s three allergic-rhinitis GWASs. (LLM, conf=0.88)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In longitudinal studies, AR often occurs for the first time in childhood and increases in prevalence with increasing age.467-471”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Incidence and prevalence of allergic rhinitis in children
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [467] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Results (Age at diagnosis and overall incidence; page not available) reports new rhinitis diagnoses during the first five years of life. Results (Prevalence; page not available) shows higher prevalence in older childhood age groups, but those figures come from a cross-sectional cohort. The Discussion (Limitations; page not available) explicitly says longitudinal analysis of prevalence rates was not performed, so this paper does not establish an increase in prevalence with age longitudinally. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [468] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [469] source
- Partly supportedcites [470] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (‘IgE reactivity to PR-10 proteins in relation to symptoms’; page not provided) report that birch-pollen allergic rhinitis rose from 2.5% at age 4 to 10.6% at age 8 and 17.8% at age 16. The Methods (‘Definition of symptoms’; page not provided) also identify new cases at ages 8 and 16. The study supports childhood onset and increasing prevalence across those ages, but it examines birch-pollen rhinitis only and does not establish how often allergic rhinitis generally first occurs in childhood rather than adulthood. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Supportedcites [471] source
The Results (page not provided) document new allergic rhinitis by age 8 among children who had no rhinitis symptoms at age 4. The Discussion (page not provided) reports that allergic rhinitis increased from 5.4% to 14.0% between ages 4 and 8, consistent with the claim for the childhood ages studied. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, the prevalence of persistent AR was found to be higher in both Northern Europe and Northern China compared to their southern counterparts.9,477”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [9] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports higher prevalence of allergic rhinitis overall in northern European countries than in southern ones. It does not make that geographic comparison specifically for persistent allergic rhinitis, and this study of Europe does not address Northern versus Southern China. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Supportedcites [477] source
The Discussion reports a higher proportion of persistent allergic rhinitis in northern than southern Chinese cities and says the same trend was reported for northern versus southern European countries. The figures describe the proportion among people with allergic rhinitis, which the paper also calls persistent AR prevalence. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“SNPs in different TLRs have been associated with AR in both GWASs (TLR1, TLR6, TLR10)486,487 and candidate gene studies (TLR8), as discussed in the next paragraph.494”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [486] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section reports a genome-wide significant SNP at TLR1 for asthma with hay fever, and the background discussion reports a TLR1 association with hay fever. Our copy does not report associations for TLR6 or TLR10, so it supports only part of the GWAS claim attributed to this paper. The separate TLR8 candidate-gene claim is cited to reference 494, not this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites [487] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s main findings report a genome-wide association for a locus near TLR1, TLR6, and TLR10, but the primary phenotype was self-reported cat, dust-mite, and pollen allergy, not allergic rhinitis specifically. Its exploratory analysis of rhinitis symptoms says effects at all index SNPs were in the same direction, without establishing a rhinitis association for the TLR locus in the passage available. The TLR8 candidate-gene claim is attached to a different citation and is not judged here (main text; page unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [494] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Several studies have convincingly linked methylation profiles to AR507-509 and IgE-related outcomes,510,511 but large-scale studies have yet to be completed.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [507] source
- Supportedcites [508] source
The citation is attached to the allergic-rhinitis portion of the sentence, not the IgE-related outcomes. The Results and Discussion section reports that CD4+ T-cell DNA methylation profiles distinguished seasonal allergic rhinitis patients from healthy controls, so this paper is an example of the studies cited for that link. The IgE statement has separate citations, and the large-scale-studies statement is uncited. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [509] source
- Supportedcites [510] source
The cited paper supports the IgE-related part of the sentence: its Abstract reports replicated associations between serum IgE concentration and low methylation at 36 loci across three datasets. The allergic-rhinitis claim has separate citations, and the statement about the need for large-scale studies is the citing authors’ framing, not a finding attributed specifically to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites [511] source
The citation is attached to the IgE-related outcomes, not the separate allergic-rhinitis citations or the statement about large-scale studies. The Results report associations between methylation at CpG sites and high serum IgE, including nine sites associated with both high IgE and atopy after adjustment for multiple tests (page unavailable in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.91)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Studies are divided according to the findings: positive studies (reporting a protective effect on AR development522-535)”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Inhalant allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [522] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [523] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [524] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [525] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [526] source
- Not matchedcites [527]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [528] source
- Partly supportedcites [529] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (page unavailable) report that cat ownership was associated with a lower risk of current rhinitis at age 5 in an inner-city cohort. The paper did not establish that early animal-dander exposure prevents the development of allergic rhinitis: it assessed cat ownership rather than animal dander generally, measured current symptoms, and says it could not determine whether the timing of cat ownership mattered. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [530] source
- Partly supportedcites [531] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Table 1; page unavailable) show that having a cat in the home during the first year was associated with lower odds of allergic rhinitis at age 4½ in a univariate analysis (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36–0.78). The paper does not establish a protective effect of animal dander exposure generally: the Results report no significant association for keeping a dog, bird, or rodent, and the Conclusions identify early fish introduction—not animal exposure—as a protective factor. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“At the protein level, LRRC32 is known to regulate T-cell proliferation, cytokine secretion, and TGF-β activation.492”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [492] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not available in our copy) links GARP, the LRRC32 protein, to production of active TGF-β in stimulated human Treg cells, but does not establish that GARP alone activates it. The same section reports no decrease in T-cell proliferation after GARP overexpression, and the paper does not show that GARP regulates cytokine secretion. (LLM, conf=0.87)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In the GWAS by Ferreira et al.,489 11 variants were associated with the combined asthma phenotype and hay fever below the genome-wide significance level (HLA-DQB1 top hit).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [489] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results describe a GWAS of asthma risk, but the passages found do not report an analysis of a combined asthma-and-hay-fever phenotype or 11 associated variants. The Results say HLA-DQ showed a consistent but non-significant effect for asthma; they do not identify HLA-DQB1 as the top hit for the claimed combined phenotype (searched: hay fever, HLA-DQB1, and 11 variants). (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“While there is a statistically significant correlation in the high-risk cohort,567 there are mixed results in the population-based studies.566,568,569”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Food allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [567] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [566] source
- Supportedcites [568] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Study Population section identifies this as a population-based birth cohort, so this source bears on the population-based part of the citing sentence, not the separately cited high-risk cohort. In Results (Table 1; page unavailable), food sensitization at six months is significantly associated with rhinitis at age four, while food-only sensitization at several later ages is not significant. This study thus provides an example of differing results within a population-based cohort. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“While they found that DEP had a marginally positive association with aeroallergen sensitization at 2 and 3 years, and increased aeroallergen sensitization increased the risk of AR, they failed to identify a significant direct correlation between DEP and AR development.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Pollution
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [578] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These particles may potentiate atopy through multiple mechanisms, including injuring the nasal epithelium, altering the immune response, and increasing the allergenicity of certain antigens.574,575”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Pollution
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [574] source
- Partly supportedcites [575] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction reports that diesel exhaust particles alter Th2 cytokine and IgE responses and may increase sensitization to allergens; it also discusses a suggestion that pollen from city-grown trees is more allergenic. It does not establish injury to the nasal epithelium as one of the mechanisms, so the full list is not supported. (LLM, conf=0.86)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Five prospective cohort studies examined the effect of tobacco on the development of AR, all of which failed to find a correlation between active or passive tobacco smoke and the development of AR.596-600”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Tobacco smoke
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [596] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [597] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [598] source
- Partly supportedcites [599] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (Predictor Variables; page unavailable) show that this prospective birth cohort assessed household environmental tobacco smoke, and the Results (Univariate Evaluation; page unavailable) do not list it among factors significantly associated with allergic rhinitis. This supports the claim for passive smoke in one cohort, but the paper does not establish the stated result for five cohorts or for active smoking. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [600] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Saulyte et al.593 identified a significant correlation between passive smoke exposure and the development of AR, but no significant relationship between active smoking or maternal prenatal passive smoke exposure and AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Tobacco smoke
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [593] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“The positive association between hay fever and high social class was later reported in the British 1958 and 1970 cohorts,607,608 as well as a Swedish survey of conscripts born from 1952 to 1977.609”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Socioeconomic factors
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [607] source
- Supportedcites [608] source
The Methods identify this study as an analysis of the 1970 British birth cohort. The Results report that hay fever was more likely among the most socially advantaged children. The separate citations in the citing sentence attach the 1958 cohort and Swedish survey to other sources, not this paper; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites [609] source
For citation 609, the Discussion reports a strong inverse relationship between low socioeconomic status and allergic rhinitis among Swedish conscripts born in the 1950s—equivalent to a positive association with higher social class. It identifies the study population as conscripts born from 1952 to 1977 and notes that the association weakened in later cohorts. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In 1829, John Bostock described 29 cases in the UK, including himself, of individuals who suffered from catarrhus aestivus or “summer cold,” which he noted occurred in patients of middle to high SES.606”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Socioeconomic factors
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [606] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the passage labeled Abstract (page unavailable), Waite says Bostock published his own case in 1819 and described 28 more cases in 1829, calling the condition “catarrhus aestivus” and associating it with the middle or upper classes. That supports 29 cases cumulatively, including his own, but not the claim that he described all 29 in 1829. The passage does not specify that all 29 cases were in the UK. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaincorrelationaln = 29- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In a pooled analysis of 11 European birth cohorts, any furred pet ownership during the first 2 years was associated with lower risk of sensitization to aeroallergens, but not with a decreased prevalence of AR later in childhood.552”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [552] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In a recent study which investigated urban vs rural differences, the risk of AR in adulthood was 20% lower in subjects exposed to pets at birth or during childhood. However, pet keeping did not explain the protective effect of living on farm with livestock compared to urban dwelling.643”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [643] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In a meta-analysis of 53 studies, 48 studies demonstrated that higher number of siblings was associated with decreased atopy, an effect that was more evident for AR than for sensitization and asthma645”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [645] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that 48 of 53 reviewed studies found a negative association between number of siblings and atopic outcomes. The Key points report an inverse association in all 17 hay-fever studies, compared with 14 of 16 sensitisation studies and 22 of 31 asthma studies. However, the Discussion explicitly says the authors did not perform a meta-analysis; this was a literature review. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Two systematic reviews have evaluated the effect of AR on QOL, with both concluding that AR patients suffer from significantly decreased general and disease-specific QOL due to the impact of physical and mental health. Furthermore, both studies demonstrated that treatment of AR leads to improvement in QOL667,668”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A systematic review of 9 studies conducted solely in urban environments evaluated perinatal pet exposure.642 Six studies found that exposure to dogs, or cats/dogs protected against allergic disease. Two studies found increased risk of allergy only in highly atopic families.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [642] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Penaranda et al.616 found high SES to be associated with AR in children/adolescents but not in adults”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Socioeconomic factors
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [616] source
The Children/adolescents results report higher odds of allergic-rhinitis symptoms for high versus low socioeconomic status (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.2–25.2). The adult results show no corresponding association for high socioeconomic status (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.8–2.0). Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In a recent U.S. case-control study, farm exposure in utero and in early childhood protected against allergen sensitization but not asthma in adulthood.648”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [648] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (Results) reports that in utero and early-childhood farm exposures were associated with reduced odds of atopy but had little or no association with adult asthma. The Discussion likewise describes an inverse association with allergic sensitization. Calling the exposure protective implies a causal effect that this case-control study does not establish. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Inverse association between exposure to endotoxin in infancy and childhood and the development of allergic sensitization has been shown in rural and urban environments, but the results have not been uniform between the studies.656,657”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [656] source
The rural-environment section reports an inverse association between endotoxin in children’s mattresses and atopy. The urban-domestic-environment section reports protective findings alongside studies finding no association or increased risk, and explicitly notes the failure of findings to replicate. The supplied passages do not give page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites [657] source
The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that growing up on a farm was protective against early allergic sensitisation and that higher domestic endotoxin exposure in nonfarming environments was associated with less allergic sensitisation in childhood. The Results and Discussion (pages unavailable) also describe inconsistent findings between the German and Dutch cohorts, supporting the qualification that results were not uniform. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These RCTs show that over a 6-month period, both the placebo and treatment group experience clinically and statistically significantly improvements in generic and disease-specific QOL; however, the improvement is greater in the treatment arm.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Impaired productivity and/or missed work occurred as a result of AR in 52% of patients.753”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [753] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section ('Absenteeism and presenteeism'; page unavailable) reports work absence and reduced productivity due to allergic rhinitis symptoms. It does not report that 52% of patients experienced either outcome; its percentages describe patients with more than 50% productivity impairment in two severity groups. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Patients with moderate to severe AR reported visiting their primary care provider for their AR more frequently than those with mild AR (1.61 vs 1.19 times per year).753”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [753] source
The Results section (“Health care visits”) reports that participants with moderate/severe allergic rhinitis visited their GP more frequently than those with mild disease, at 1.61 versus 1.19 times per year. The paper specifies that these visits were for seasonal allergic rhinitis. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In another UK study, patients with moderate to severe AR reported 37.7 days a year when their productivity was affected by their AR symptoms; this is almost double that reported by patients in the same study with mild AR symptoms (21.0 days).753”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [753] source
The Results section (“Absenteeism and presenteeism”) reports that patients with moderate/severe allergic rhinitis had 37.7 days per year when productivity was affected by symptoms, compared with 21.0 days for patients with mild disease. It explicitly describes the former as almost double the latter. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The indirect costs of AR, such as absenteeism and presenteeism, are also significant and actually make up the majority of the cost burden of AR.767,768”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [767]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [768] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not available in our copy) mentions lost school days and increasing direct and indirect costs of allergic rhinitis, supporting the existence of indirect costs. It does not say that absenteeism and presenteeism account for a majority of the cost burden or provide a breakdown of those costs. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Data from this study suggested that patients with mild AR have less impact on the health economy, with costs averaging about 25% of the costs for those with moderate to severe disease.667,766”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [667] source
The Background states that patients with mild allergic rhinitis have costs around a quarter of those with moderate-to-severe disease, citing reference 39. The References identify reference 39 as the TOTALL study. (LLM, conf=0.95)
- Partly supportedcites [766] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Direct and indirect costs section reports €464.4 per year for mild persistent allergic rhinitis, about a quarter of the €1,756.6 for moderate-to-severe persistent disease. The citing sentence omits the persistent-disease qualifier, so the paper does not establish that the 25% comparison applies to all patients with mild versus moderate-to-severe allergic rhinitis. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“As expected in patients with SAR, QOL is better outside of peak season and worsens during allergen exposure.690,691”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [690] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion links exposure to pollen or animal dander with allergic symptoms and possible subsequent impairments in health-related quality of life. It does not compare quality of life inside and outside peak season, or establish the claimed seasonal pattern in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. (LLM, conf=0.72)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [691] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“If conjunctivitis is to be assessed simultaneously with rhinitis symptoms, then the Rhinitis Total Symptom Score (RTSS) can be combined with Rescue Medication Score (RMS) to yield the combined score (CS).805”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [805] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Materials and methods section identifies a combined Symptom Medication Score as the trial’s primary outcome, and the Findings table reports separate symptom and medication scores alongside it. The paper studies allergic rhino-conjunctivitis, but our copy does not identify the components as RTSS and RMS or state the proposed rule for assessing conjunctivitis with rhinitis symptoms. No page numbers are available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Intradermal testing has also been described in the evaluation of sensitivities to other substances, including local anesthetic agents, neuromuscular blocking agents, antibiotics, and contrast media.837-840”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [837] source
- Supportedcites [838] source
The cited paper supports the neuromuscular-blocking-agent part of the multi-citation sentence. Its Methods describe intradermal injections of NMBAs, and its Discussion describes intradermal tests used to investigate suspected sensitivity to them (page numbers not provided). (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not matchedcites [839]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [840]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Advancing technologies such as multiplex allergen screening, component serology, and automated SPT imaging devices may be expensive and unattainable by some clinicians.792-795”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [792] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [793] source
- Partly supportedcites [794] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Resource use and costs section (page unavailable) accounts for test, equipment, maintenance, and personnel costs for multiplex allergen testing; the cost tables include a £28,999 reader for ImmunoCAP ISAC. This supports the expense concern for multiplex testing, but the cited paper does not establish that these tools are unattainable for some clinicians or address the cost of automated SPT imaging devices. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [795] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Omalizumab appears to suppress skin test reactivity in tandem with dramatic reductions in serum free IgE, and allergy skin test responses return to normal within 8 weeks of discontinuation.875”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [875] source
The Abstract reports a 96%–99% reduction in serum free IgE and marked suppression of skin-test reactions during omalizumab treatment. The Titrated allergen SPT section reports that skin-test reactivity returned to prestudy baseline by day 378, eight weeks after the day-322 end of the reduced-dose period. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Tu et al.904 demonstrated an insufficient diagnostic accuracy of tIgE levels to detect allergic diseases regardless of which cutoff value is being used; tIgE was linked more to atopy than directly to symptoms.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [904] source
The Discussion states that total IgE discriminated atopy independently of allergic symptoms but had insufficient accuracy on its own to detect allergic diseases in the Asian children studied. The ‘Validity of total IgE’ section reports moderate or poor diagnostic sensitivity and specificity across the cutoffs evaluated; the claim’s cutoff language is supported for those tested cutoffs. (LLM, conf=0.92)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“It has been reported that this ratio might be useful in the prediction of AIT effectiveness,906-908 as recently outlined by the EAACI Position Paper.909”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [906] source
- Not matchedcites [907]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites [908] source
The Discussion (p. 8) identifies the serum allergen-specific IgE/total IgE ratio as a possible predictor of clinical response to immunotherapy. Its clinical implications statement says the ratio significantly correlated with response in monosensitized patients, supporting the citing sentence’s cautious wording. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [909] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Topical steroid treatment has been demonstrated to suppress the wheal and flare reaction in treated skin areas, creating the possibility of false-negative test results.882-885”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [882] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [883] source
- Could not verifycites [884] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods describe oral prednisone, not topical treatment of skin. The Results report that skin-test wheal size did not change after that systemic treatment. Our copy does not address whether topical steroids suppress reactions in treated skin or cause false-negative tests (searched: topical steroid, wheal and flare, false negative). (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [885] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Both intradermal testing and SPT rely heavily on technician skill for interpretation of the wheal and flare reaction.856,928,937”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [856] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Skin testing section specifies wheal and erythema criteria for interpreting both SPT and intradermal results. It does not say that interpretation relies heavily on technician skill. No page number is available for this passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [928] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [937] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, a recent meta-analysis indicates that SPT remains an accurate test, which when combined with a detailed clinical history, helps confirm the diagnosis of AR830”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [830] source
The Discussion describes skin-prick testing as reasonably accurate for patients with suspected allergic rhinitis, and the Results report pooled sensitivity of 88.4% and specificity of 77.1%. The Background says diagnosis draws on clinical characteristics and that evidence of allergen sensitization usually combines skin or blood testing with the patient’s exposure history. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.89)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The sensitivity and specificity of SPT depends on the allergen tested, quality of reagents, the specific methodologies employed, technician expertise, and patient demographics.928,937-942”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [928] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [937] source
- Partly supportedcites [938] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction identifies extract composition and potency, testing procedures, and patient factors such as age and gender as influences on SPT responses. The Discussion links lancet technique and clinician training to false-positive and false-negative results. Our copy does not establish that sensitivity and specificity vary by the particular allergen tested, and the study used histamine rather than allergens. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [939] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [940] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [941] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [942] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, SPT wheal size and sensitivity depend on the specific device selection and the choice of control reagents used for testing.928,938”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [928] source
- Partly supportedcites [938] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that lancet weight and histamine-control concentration affected wheal responses, and the Introduction explains why positive and negative controls matter for interpreting SPT. However, the study used one lancet design and tested healthy volunteers with histamine rather than allergens; it did not compare device selections or measure diagnostic sensitivity. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“sIgE may help in the selection of candidates for AIT and possibly predict the response.919,924”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [919] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion says high sIgE levels might help identify patients with the best indication for allergen immunotherapy, supporting the candidate-selection point. It also says the relationship between sIgE level and symptom improvement with immunotherapy still needs to be studied, so it does not establish sIgE as a predictor of treatment response. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [924] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The average pooled sensitivity of SPT is 85% which is often slightly higher than that of serum sIgE testing830”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [830] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Primary analysis; no page available) report 85.0% pooled SPT sensitivity when an additional study is included in a sensitivity analysis; the main analysis reports 88.4%. The paper does not report a sensitivity comparison with serum specific IgE testing, so the claim that SPT is often slightly more sensitive is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The cost of a single Immuno-CAP ISAC test, which includes 112 components from 51 allergens, is approximately $500 to $600 in the United States.794,945”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [794] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The ImmunoCAP Immuno-Solid phase Allergy Chip section confirms that ISAC 112 tests 112 components from 51 allergen sources. The cost calculation (Table 12, reproduced in Appendix 8) gives £219.51 per patient tested, but our copy does not support a US price of $500–$600 for a single test. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [945] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In addition to positive systemic sIgE, AR patients have been shown to have sIgE in the nasal mucosa with evidence that class switching and antibody production occurs locally.309-312,377,950,951”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [309] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [310] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [311] source
- Supportedcites [312] source
The introductory passage states that plasma cells synthesize IgE in the nasal mucosa of patients with allergic rhinitis, providing a local source for sensitization to inhaled allergens. The Discussion reports direct evidence of local class switching to IgE and reiterates that IgE synthesis occurs in the nasal mucosa. The supplied passages do not give page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites [377] source
The Abstract reports allergen-specific IgE-positive plasma cells in the nasal mucosa of allergic rhinitis patients. The Discussion concludes that nasal B-cells and plasma cells produce specific IgE locally and describes evidence that isotype switching may also occur in the nose. The claim's wording, “with evidence,” preserves that qualification. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [950] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In recent years, microarray allergy testing systems such as ImmunoCAP ISAC (Thermo Fisher Scientific/Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden) have been introduced in an effort to offer a comprehensive in vitro allergen test panel.794”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [794] source
The ImmunoCAP Immuno-Solid phase Allergy Chip section describes ISAC as a microarray-based blood test intended to assess antibodies to multiple allergens. It specifies that ISAC 112 simultaneously tests for IgE antibodies to 112 components from 51 allergen sources, supporting the description of a broad in vitro allergen panel. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In this LAR population, early studies suggest that AIT can decrease symptoms and medication usage, and improve QOL.288,957”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [288] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “AIT in local AR with/without asthma” section reports that immunotherapy reduced symptoms and rescue-medication use in patients with local allergic rhinitis. It says these patients can have impaired quality of life, but does not report that immunotherapy improved it. No page number is available for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [957] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Like traditional AR patients, LAR can be classified as perennial or seasonal, and similar findings in the nasal mucosa have been reported in both of these populations.300,301,953”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [300] source
The Abstract describes local nasal specific IgE in patients with persistent symptoms and says the observation extends to patients with seasonal symptoms. The Discussion reports nasal inflammatory findings in both groups, although the seasonal group had a stronger inflammatory response; the claim says similar, not identical. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [301] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [953] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The basophil activation test (BAT) is an ex vivo peripheral blood test that has been shown to be useful in the diagnosis of allergy to food and drugs, along with other hypersensitivity syndromes, when first-line tests (SPT and serum sIgE) are discordant with clinical history or do not exist, and for monitoring of AIT.966”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [966] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Allergens related to sensitization to cockroaches are Bla g 1, Bla g 2, Bla g 4, and Bla g 5, although in certain populations tropomyosins (Bla g 7 and/or Per a 7) can be important.1000”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1000] source
The Allergenic Importance section says a cocktail of Bla g 1, Bla g 2, Bla g 4, and Bla g 5 would diagnose 95% of US cockroach-allergy cases. The Cross-Reactivity section identifies Per a 7 as cockroach tropomyosin and reports that it reacts with approximately 50% of sera from asthmatic children allergic to cockroaches. The claim's “and/or Per a 7” wording is supported; our copy need not establish Bla g 7 separately. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“When comparing the singleplex and multiplex assays, concordance of results vary between allergens tested, and the sensitivity of multiplex platform is lower than that of singleplex, particularly when sIgE levels are low.983”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [983] source
The Micro-array technology section says that concordance between ISAC and singleplex ImmunoCAP varies by allergen. It also states that ImmunoCAP is more sensitive than ISAC at low sIgE levels. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“However, both of these tests can be positive in the absence of any symptoms, and neither positive SPT nor IgE can confirm the expression of rhinitis symptoms upon allergen exposure.1009,1010”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Sensitization vs clinical allergy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1009] source
- Supportedcites [1010] source
The Abstract (p. 4) identifies skin prick testing and serum specific IgE as sensitization tests and says sensitization is only loosely related to clinical allergy. The patient-perspective section (p. 16) says even a positive test may not establish clinical allergy, while the Airways section (p. 31) discusses rhinitis symptoms after exposure to inhalant allergens. Together, these support the point that a positive test alone cannot confirm that rhinitis symptoms will occur on exposure. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Fel d 1 is the major allergen component in cat allergy, indicating specific sensitization.996”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [996] source
The Background identifies Fel d 1 as the major cat allergen and says it is the sensitizing allergen in up to 95% of cases. The Results report Fel d 1–specific IgE in both allergic and asymptomatically sensitized patients, supporting sensitization rather than necessarily clinical allergy. (LLM, conf=0.91)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In epidemiology and clinical practice, patients are typically diagnosed as being “sensitized” based on a positive SPT (usually ≥3 mm wheal diameter), or a positive specific serum IgE (usually ≥0.35 kU/L [specific IgEs are reported in arbitrary units, thus the unit kU]).1007,1008”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Sensitization vs clinical allergy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1007] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page not available in our copy) calls skin prick testing the method of choice for routine diagnosis, and §1.1 links positive allergen skin tests to IgE-mediated responses. The passages do not give a ≥3 mm wheal cutoff or address a ≥0.35 kU/L serum-specific IgE cutoff; searches for both numbers and test-interpretation criteria found no such passage. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1008] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Although IgE-mediated sensitization has been consistently shown to be an important risk factor for rhinitis,520,1004 the strength of this association is not consistent.1005,1006”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Sensitization vs clinical allergy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [520] source
- Partly supportedcites [1004] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation is attached to the claim that the association’s strength is not consistent. In Results > Factors associated with rhinitis (page not available), sensitization to grass and cat had different estimated associations with rhinitis (odds ratios 3.87 and 2.05), supporting variation by allergen in this cohort of school-age children. The paper does not establish a broader inconsistency across populations or studies. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1005] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1006] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“The NPT is designed for AR, while conjunctival provocation test (CPT) may be used in patients with rhinoconjunctivitis or AR alone.1069,1070”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1069] source
The Rationale and indications section (p. 1) identifies nasal allergen provocation testing as indicated when allergic rhinitis is suspected. The same section (p. 4) describes conjunctival testing for IgE-mediated ocular allergy and says it can be used even when patients with allergic rhinitis report no ocular symptoms. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1070] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, sensitization to proteins of plant origin strongly predicts AR, and sensitization to animal lipocalins is predictive of asthma.1018,1019”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Sensitization vs clinical allergy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1018] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that sensitization to CG1, which contains plant-origin protein families, was strongly associated with hay fever. It also reports that CG3 was strongly associated with asthma and that 8 of 9 children sensitized to the animal lipocalin Can f 2 had asthma. The paper does not establish that sensitization to animal lipocalins as a class predicts asthma. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Partly supportedcites [1019] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Key findings and Association between longitudinal sensitization trajectories and clinical outcomes sections report a strong association between timothy grass sensitization trajectories and rhinitis in children. That supports the plant-allergen example, but the paper studies grass rather than plant proteins generally, and it does not address animal lipocalins as predictors of asthma. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In more recent years, other variants have been defined, including NAR with mast cells (NARMA), with neutrophils (NARNE), and with eosinophils and mast cells (NARESMA).1097”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1097] source
The Review section, “Nasal cytology in allergic and non-allergic rhinitis,” explicitly identifies NARMA, NARNE, and NARESMA as forms of non-allergic rhinitis in children. The Review also describes these as recently identified disorders. Page numbers are not provided in the supplied copy. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This systematic review found acaricides to be the most effective as a single measure or in combination with other measures to decrease HDM levels and improve AR symptoms.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1126] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The indexed review text reports reductions in house dust mite load in seven of nine trials and calls acaricides the most promising intervention studied. It suggests acaricides and extensive bedroom-control programmes may reduce rhinitis symptoms, but cautions that the trials were generally small and poor quality. It does not establish acaricides, alone or in combination, as definitively the most effective measure for both outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Most studies included 1 or more interventions aimed at reducing cockroach counts and allergen (Bla g 1 and Bla g 2) levels1133-1140; however, a few focused on eliminating multiple allergens (eg, HDM, cockroach, rodent, cat, dog).1141,1142”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1133] source
The Introduction describes interventions aimed at reducing cockroach infestations and Bla g 1 and Bla g 2 levels. The Results report reductions in cockroach counts and both allergens. This source supports the cockroach-intervention clause; the separate multiple-allergen clause is assigned to other citations. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1134] source
- Supportedcites [1135] source
The Abstract describes this study as an intervention to reduce cockroach numbers and Bla g 1 levels, and reports similar results for Bla g 2. It therefore fits the group of cockroach-focused intervention studies cited for the first clause. The separate claim about studies targeting multiple allergens has different citations and is not attributed to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1136] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1137] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1138] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1139] source
- Supportedcites [1140] source
This paper is one of the cockroach interventions cited for the first clause. Its Methods describe bait treatment and cockroach trapping, while its Results measure both Bla g 1 and Bla g 2 in dust. The claim describes what the intervention addressed, not whether it succeeded in reducing allergen; the multiple-allergen clause has different citations. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1141] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1142] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Although cockroach count could be significantly reduced in single-family homes using bait traps, re-infestation and high allergen levels remained an ongoing problem in multifamily buildings.1140”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1140] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report significantly fewer trapped cockroaches in bait-treated single-family homes. The Discussion reports that allergen in dust did not fall in a separate study involving mostly apartments, but describes reinfestation there as “almost certain,” not as an observed ongoing outcome. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The most effective treatment for eliminating infestation and reducing allergen load was professional pest control.1135”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1135] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (page not provided) report that entomologist-guided insecticide bait treatment reduced cockroach trap counts and allergen loads in the crossed-over control homes. But the paper does not establish professional pest control as the most effective treatment or show complete elimination of infestation; the Discussion says the effectiveness of commercial exterminators remained to be determined. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Pet removal is a commonly cited strategy without high-quality outcomes evaluation.1118,1144,1145”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1118] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1144] source
- Supportedcites [1145] source
The Preface calls advising families to get rid of a pet a common practice. The evidence-search protocol says few studies on this topic meet the ideal randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design; the Tertiary prevention section describes a prospective pet-removal study with clinical outcomes, but participants chose whether to remove their pets. Thus the paper supports the lack of high-quality outcomes evaluation, not a lack of outcomes evaluation altogether. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Cockroach infestation and allergen concentrations are often high in multi-occupant dwellings in densely populated inner city areas; although elevated levels of cockroach allergen are also found in homes in warmer, rural regions.1129-1131”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1129] source
- Partly supportedcites [1130] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) reports higher cockroach-allergen levels in earlier low-income urban studies and notes that multi-family apartment buildings were more common in the inner-city neighborhoods discussed. Its Climate section says levels are often lower in cold areas than in warmer regions. But the paper does not establish that elevated levels are common in warmer rural homes; it reports a low central measure in a rural Arkansas study. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1131] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In grass immunotherapy-treated patients, nasal challenge test scores significantly decreased in the first (p < 0.001) and second year (p = 0.003).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1712] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirectn = 37 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“After treatment in the year 2009, median rhinitis symptoms improved by 48% in the treatment group vs 10% in the placebo group (p = 0.003); a year later, this was 40% compared to 18% for placebo (p = 0.43).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1715] source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirectn = 98 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Eczema at the application site was significantly higher in the treatment arm, and there were no serious adverse events.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1712] source
The Local adverse events section reports significantly more reactions at the patch site in the allergen-treated group than in the placebo group (P = .03), identifying eczema as the most frequent reaction. The Safety and tolerability section states that no serious adverse events were observed. Page numbers are not provided for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In placebo-treated patients, scores decreased after year 1 (p = 0.03), but the effect diminished in year 2 (p = 0.53).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1712] source
The Nasal provocation section reports lower nasal provocation test scores in the placebo group after the first pollen season (P = .03), but not approximately six months after the second season (P = .53). The Discussion also says the placebo effect vanished in the second pollen season. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In the first year, allergen-specific IgG4 increased in the treatment group, while allergen-specific IgE decreased in the placebo group; there was no difference in both measures compared to baseline in the second year.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1715] source
The paper’s results report that allergen-specific IgG4 increased after allergen EPIT in 2009, while allergen-specific IgE decreased after placebo EPIT. They also state that after 2010 neither measure differed significantly from pre-treatment values in either group. The cited sentence makes these claims; its surrounding description as a “fourth trial” is not part of that sentence. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“CPT scores improved after the first year in the treatment group but not the placebo group.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1715] source
The paper’s Abstract reports a significant decrease in conjunctival reactivity after the first treatment season, while the conjunctival provocation test threshold did not change after placebo. The supplied copy does not give a page number. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Epicutaneous immunotherapy has recently been investigated in a mouse model using nanoparticles containing an allergen encoding DNA.1710”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1710] source
The Abstract reports that DermAll-OVA, a plasmid-DNA nanomedicine expressing ovalbumin as a model allergen, was administered topically and tested in allergic mice. The Discussion describes it as a patch treatment containing allergen-encoding DNA. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Two benefits of combination therapy have been described: decreased incidence of AIT-associated systemic allergic reactions and improved control of AR symptoms.1400-1402,1734-1736”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1400] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract reports that combination therapy reduced allergic-rhinitis symptom load by 48% compared with immunotherapy alone. The discussion describes a reduction in immunotherapy-induced systemic reactions only as a speculative possibility and says a study was planned to investigate it; the Safety section does not establish a decreased incidence. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1401] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1402] source
- Supportedcites [1734] source
The Abstract states that adding omalizumab to ragweed immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis significantly reduced systemic side effects and enhanced efficacy compared with immunotherapy alone. The introductory passage further specifies reduced seasonal severity scores and fewer adverse events; the Discussion notes that these clinical findings came from a previous study. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1735] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1736] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Kuehr et al.1400 evaluated 221 adolescents (6 to 17 years) with moderate to severe AR and sensitization to birch and grass pollen. Using a randomized, controlled design, the effectiveness of combination therapy was evaluated during sequential birch and grass pollen seasons, with comparison of AIT +/− concurrent omalizumab. Significant findings included superiority of combination therapies vs AIT”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1400] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (page unavailable) describe children and adolescents aged 6–17 with confirmed birch and grass pollen sensitization. The Efficacy section (page unavailable) reports a 48% lower median symptom load across the combined birch and grass seasons with SIT plus omalizumab than with SIT alone. Our copy does not establish that all 221 participants had moderate-to-severe rhinitis, and the study included children as well as adolescents. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Finally, omalizumab has been associated with anaphylactic reactions in 0.09% to 0.2% of patients, with current recommendations to monitor patients for 30 minutes following administration.1742,1743”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1742] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Incidence section reports an anaphylaxis-reporting rate of 0.09% and cites product information reporting anaphylaxis in at least 0.2% of patients. The OJTF Conclusions and Recommendations section recommends 30 minutes of observation only after the first three injections; it recommends two hours for those initial injections. The claim omits that distinction. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Partly supportedcites [1743] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) estimates anaphylaxis frequency at approximately 0.2% from postmarketing reports and 0.1% in premarketing trials, close to the claimed lower bound of 0.09%. The Results (page unavailable) say only about one-third of reactions began within 30 minutes; the passages found do not recommend 30 minutes of post-administration monitoring. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Most patients with asthma (both allergic and non-allergic) also have rhinitis, whereas 10% to 40% of patients with AR have comorbid asthma.101,1167”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Asthma
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [101] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 9.1.2 says the majority of patients with asthma experience rhinitis symptoms. Section 9.1.1 gives the 10%–40% asthma prevalence for patients with rhinitis generally, not specifically for patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), so the narrower population in the claim is not fully supported. The supplied copy gives no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1167] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A recently completed pilot study of OMIT vs SLIT identified clinically meaningful improvements in disease-specific QOL measures with a significant rise in specific IgG4 over the first 6 months of treatment.1729”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1729] source
The Results (Quality-of-Life Scores) report clinically meaningful RQLQ improvements in both OMIT and SLIT groups at 12 months. The Results (IgE and IgG4 Levels) report a statistically significant rise in specific IgG4 from baseline to 6 months in both groups. The six-month timing applies to IgG4, not the quality-of-life measurement. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“However, the efficacy of oral/gastrointestinal immunotherapy has been demonstrated for the treatment of food hypersensitivity, where this approach remains investigational.1726”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1726] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports increased reaction thresholds with oral tolerance induction and describes it as an active strategy, while noting the lack of large controlled studies. But this study concerned children allergic to cow’s milk or hen’s egg, and permanent tolerance was nearly identical in the treatment and control groups (36% versus 35%). It therefore supports a promising, still-investigational approach, but not demonstrated efficacy across food hypersensitivity generally. (LLM, conf=0.82)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Most inhaled allergens are associated with nasal1787 and bronchial symptoms, but in epidemiologic studies, differences have been observed (eg, in pollen allergy).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergic rhinitis as a risk factor for asthma
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1787] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not supplied) reports that pollen sensitivity was less common in perennial than seasonal rhinitis, and Medical History (table 4; page not supplied) reports differences in wheeze and asthma between rhinitis groups. These findings support the claim that epidemiologic differences occur, including for pollen. The paper does not establish the broader assertion that most inhaled allergens are associated with both nasal and bronchial symptoms. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The studies reviewed in this section are limited to prospective randomized trials to minimize inherent biases and weaknesses of retrospective studies.1794”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Treatment of allergic rhinitis and its effect on asthma
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1794] source
The Discussion identifies a consequential bias in an observational study and explains how it produced a spurious appearance of effectiveness. This supports the cited rationale for avoiding such biases; limiting the review to prospective randomized trials is the citing authors’ own methodological choice, not a claim attributed to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Concerning changes in prevalence of rhinitis and asthma, some studies have demonstrated a parallel increasing prevalence of asthma and rhinitis,1765,1766 whereas others have not.1767-1775”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Asthma
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1765] source
The Methods and results section reports that asthma prevalence rose from 1966 to 2003 and allergic rhinitis prevalence increased steadily after 1970 in young Finnish men. This supports the cited point that some studies found both conditions increasing, without implying identical rates of increase. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1766] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1767] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1768] source
- Supportedcites [1769] source
This paper supports the “whereas others have not” part of the citing sentence. In Participants, methods, and results (BMJ 2004, pp. 1052–53), it reports that wheezing and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms both fell between 1995 and 2002 in 12–14-year-olds in the British Isles, rather than showing parallel increases. It separately reports increases in lifetime reports of asthma and hay fever, so the distinction between symptoms and lifetime labels matters. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1770] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1771] source
- Not matchedcites [1772]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1773] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1774] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Omalizumab is an anti-IgE mAb that binds free IgE, preventing interactions with high-affinity IgE receptors and resulting in receptor down-regulation on inflammatory cells.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1815] source
The Mechanism of action of omalizumab section describes omalizumab as a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody that prevents free IgE from interacting with IgE receptors. The same section says reduced free IgE leads to down-regulation of receptor expression on basophils and dendritic cells, supporting the claimed mechanism. Page numbers are not supplied in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Omalizumab has demonstrated effectiveness separately for asthma as well as AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1393] source
- Supportedcites [1815] source
The Clinical efficacy section reports fewer asthma exacerbations with omalizumab in patients with severe persistent allergic asthma. The Omalizumab in allergic rhinitis section separately reports reduced nasal symptoms in patients with seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis and explicitly describes evidence of efficacy in both conditions. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1816] source
- Not matchedcites [1817]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [1818]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In 2008, the ARIA group reviewed the evidence for effectiveness of montelukast in treating patients with asthma and AR, finding improvement of both nasal and bronchial symptoms as well as reduction of β-agonist use.101”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [101] source
The antileukotrienes discussion, shown in the Pharmacodynamics passage (page not supplied), reports that studies in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma found improved nasal and bronchial symptoms with montelukast. It also reports reduced β-agonist use. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“AIT is also thought to help halt the progression of allergic disease, including prevention of new allergic sensitivities and the development of asthma.1624,1626,1678,1797,1798,1824-1826”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1624] source
- Supportedcites [1626] source
The Introduction says immunotherapy may modify the natural history of allergic disease and reports evidence that it can prevent or delay asthma in patients with allergic rhinitis. The Discussion supports early treatment to prevent both polysensitization and asthma, while clarifying that this study itself did not assess asthma development. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1678] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“While positive testing does indicate evidence of sensitization, this does not necessarily correlate with allergic nasal disease.1843”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1843] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract treats positive skin-test responses as evidence of allergic sensitization. The passages from the Discussion and the additional search do not address whether a positive test correlates with allergic nasal disease, so that part of the claim is not supported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Both SCIT and SLIT have been shown to be efficacious for AR, though there is ongoing debate as to whether 1 form is superior.1697,1703”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1697] source
- Supportedcites [1703] source
The Abstract reports statistically significant benefits for both SCIT and SLIT versus placebo, particularly in adults. It also says the evidence did not consistently establish that either treatment is superior, matching the citing sentence's qualification. (LLM, conf=0.94)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The evidence suggests that AR is associated with 35% to 74% prevalence of AC and that among patients with AC, the prevalence of AR may be as high as 97%.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Conjunctivitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1884] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1885] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1886] source
- Not matchedcites [1887]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [1888] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that 65% of patients with allergic rhinitis in a cited Spanish study also had conjunctivitis, supporting a value within the claimed 35%–74% range, but it does not establish that full range. The Results list 346 patients with both rhinitis and conjunctivitis among 497 with conjunctivitis (about 70%); the paper does not support the claimed prevalence of up to 97%. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [1889] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (‘Frequency of the risk factors in 4 groups’; page not provided) report a previous history of allergic conjunctivitis in 29.0% of children with allergic rhinitis, supporting an association. Our copy does not report the claimed 35%–74% range or an allergic-rhinitis prevalence as high as 97% among patients with allergic conjunctivitis; searches for those figures and the reverse prevalence found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not matchedcites [1890]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“The estimated rate of systemic reaction from a pollen-food allergy is 10% and the estimated rate of anaphylaxis is 1.7% to 10%.1742,1919,1920”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Food allergy and pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS)
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [1742] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The 'Incidence of potential Xolair (omalizumab) anaphylactic reactions' section reports a 0.09% anaphylaxis-reporting rate for patients receiving omalizumab, not rates associated with pollen-food allergy. Searches for pollen-food allergy, systemic reactions, and the claimed percentages found no passage addressing those estimates. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Not matchedcites [1919]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1920] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“affecting approximately 5% to 20% of children aged 6 to 7 and 13 to 14 years.1896”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Atopic dermatitis (AD)
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1896] source
The Discussion states that the study suggests atopic eczema affects around 5% to 20% of children aged 6 to 7 and 13 to 14 years worldwide. The estimate is based on reported symptoms, as the paper notes. (LLM, conf=0.95)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“increasing severity of AD has been shown to correlate with an increased risk of developing AR, with prevalence of AR among people with AD ranging from 15% to 61%.1898-1900”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Atopic dermatitis (AD)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1898] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1899] source
- Partly supportedcites [1900] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Atopic Comorbidities; page not available) report that allergic rhinitis developed more often in children with greater baseline atopic dermatitis severity. They report 18.5% during the double-blind period, but do not give the claimed 15%–61% prevalence range among people with atopic dermatitis. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The study however did find that 33.5% of patients were diagnosed with combinations of respiratory disease; the most frequent was asthma and AR1987,1988”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [1987] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Frequency of respiratory disease) report that 249 of 1001 patients—about 25%, not 33.5%—had a combination of respiratory diseases. They do confirm that asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR) were the most frequent combination. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites [1988] source
The Results section (Frequency of respiratory disease) reports that 335 of 1,000 enrolled patients (33.5%) had combinations of the four respiratory diseases. It also says that 80% of those patients had asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR), with or without other conditions. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“INCS have been shown to improve nasal congestion, daytime somnolence, and sleep quality.2029”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Sleep disturbance and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [2029] source
The paper’s Abstract (pp. 1264–1266) reports that pooled results from three placebo-controlled intranasal corticosteroid studies showed significantly reduced nasal congestion, sleep problems, and daytime sleepiness in patients with perennial rhinitis. This supports the cited claim about improved congestion, daytime somnolence, and sleep quality. (LLM, conf=0.94)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A meta-analysis by Weiner et al.1297 found that INCSs were more effective than oral antihistamines at treating nasal blockage, although there was no significant differences between treatments on nasal resistance.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Sleep disturbance and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [1297] source
The Nasal symptoms section reports significantly greater relief of nasal blockage with intranasal corticosteroids than with oral antihistamines. The Other outcomes section says that the one trial reporting nasal resistance found no difference between treatments. The claim accurately distinguishes these outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“8212 published from 2010 to the present day”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A search of “allergic rhinitis” in the PubMed database yielded 4135 articles published between 1945 and 1979.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Abstract > Conclusion:
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The next 20 years (1980-2000) saw 7064 AR articles published.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“8143 AR articles published between 2000 and 2010”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While most studies show an association between high SES and the diagnosis of AR, this is not a consistent outcome.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Socioeconomic factors
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the association of pet-keeping in childhood with the subsequent development of AR is more controversial, and difficult to establish.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“- Harm: None known.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Benefit: Reduction in cockroach count, but allergen levels (Bla g 1 and Bla g 2) often above acceptable levels for clinical benefits. No studies included clinical endpoints related to AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, there is a paucity of clinical trials evaluating the clinical efficacy of therapeutic strategies.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Benefit: Reduced concentration of environmental HDM antigens with potential improvement in symptom scores and QOL.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Benefit: Decreased environmental antigen exposure with possible reduction in nasal symptoms and secondary prevention of asthma.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Again, expert opinion endorses these strategies, but there is no evidence to support their clinical efficacy.1159,1160”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cost: Moderate. Multiple treatments applications required as well as a multi-interventional approach.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harm: None.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Most studies did not include clinical endpoints; however, those that did evaluate clinical outcomes focused on asthma symptoms, hospitalizations or emergency room visits, and medication usage.1141,1142”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harm: Emotional distress caused by removal of household pets. Financial and time costs of potentially ineffective intervention.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harm: Minimal harm with very frequent, but mild, local adverse events. Very rare systemic adverse events.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SLIT can be continued safely in the pregnant patient.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Benefit: Decreased objective nasal resistance, and improved symptom control in 1 study when used in combination with H1 antagonists.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cost: Increased cost associated with H2 antagonist.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Benefit: Decreased allergen exposure with possible reduction in symptoms and need for allergy medication, along with improved QOL.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Data on cost of SLIT compared to SCIT is variable.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harm: Financial and time costs of potentially ineffective intervention.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Cost: Direct costs low (average $2 per daily dose). Indirect costs for newer generation agents lower than first-generation agents.1172,1173”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1172]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [1173]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Benefits-Harm Assessment: Benefit of treatment over placebo is small, but tangible. SLIT benefit is demonstrated beyond the improvement seen with rescue medications.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Three of the 4 studies examined symptoms after nasal allergen challenge, and none demonstrated efficacy of H2 antihistamines, either alone or in conjunction with an H1 antihistamine in diminishing allergic symptoms.1195-1198”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cost: Low, but dependent on the EC strategy (ie, for occupational allergy ventilation measures and other “engineering controls” may be high).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cost: Intermediate, SLIT becomes cost-effective compared to pharmacotherapy after several years of administration.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Few small studies have investigated the impact of H2 receptor antagonism, with varied results (Table IX.B.1.b).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harm: Mild drowsiness, fatigue, headache, nausea, and dry mouth.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Four studies investigated the impact of H2 antagonism on symptoms; however, these studies did not utilize standardized outcome measures as they pre-dated the development of such tools.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Minimal harm with SLIT, greater risk for SCIT.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The clinical significance of these objective findings is unclear, and the studies that employed PROMs did not demonstrate subjective improvement in nasal obstruction.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Transcutaneous immunotherapy resulted in systemic and local reactions. Systemic reactions occurred in up to 14.6% of patients receiving grass transcutaneous immunotherapy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All trials have used subjective measures to define clinical endpoints, most commonly in the form of symptom questionnaires.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To date, 4 clinical trials using this procedure have been published (Table IX.D.5)”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is limited and inconsistent data on benefit of the treatment, while there is a concerning rate of adverse effects.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One trial1717 used recombinant major cat dander allergen fused to a translocation sequence and to part of the human invariant chain generating a modular antigen transporter, or “MAT,” vaccine.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1717] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Benefit: Reduced treatment period, reduced number of injections, reduced dose of allergen injected, decreased risk of adverse events.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Witten et al.1721 demonstrated immunological changes with ILIT, but no improvement in symptoms.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1721] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“at this juncture there are limited studies that show variable and limited effectiveness, and a significant rate of adverse reactions.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In total, 127 patients have received active treatment and 45 patients have received placebo.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plainn = 127- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Benefit: Improved safety of accelerated cluster and rush AIT protocols, with decreased symptom and rescue medication scores among a carefully selected population.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Anaphylaxis is a persistent concern with AIT, with incidence of reported systemic reactions as high as 65% following rush protocols.1737,1738”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1737]
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1738] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Additionally, oral/gastrointestinal allergen administration requires extract concentrations approaching 200 times greater than SCIT, and is associated with adverse gastrointestinal side effects.1623,1724”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Harm: Financial cost and risk of anaphylactic reactions.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Massanari et al.1736 evaluated 248 patients with moderate persistent asthma receiving omalizumab pretreatment or placebo prior to cluster AIT, an accelerated AIT buildup schedule. A significantly lower incidence of systemic and respiratory-related reactions was reported among the omalizumab group, with an improved likelihood of reaching maintenance therapy compared to the group without preventive”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1736] source
plaindirectn = 248- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, high rates of local adverse reactions limit patient compliance, with 1 prior study finding that 43.9% of treated children abandoned this treatment option within the first year of therapy.1731”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1731] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Rolinck-Werninghaus et al.1401 completed a subgroup analysis of study patients receiving specific AIT +/− concurrent omalizumab during the matched grass season. Results included decreased symptoms scores and rescue medication usage for patients receiving combination vs either therapy alone.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1401] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Double-blind, placebo-controlled studies have evaluated oral/gastrointestinal immunotherapy for the treatment of birch,1723 cat,1724 and ragweed1725 sensitivity, without a significant decline in nasal symptoms, improvements in provocation testing, or reductions in medication utilization.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“High-quality studies of inhaled/intrabronchial immunotherapy for the treatment of AR have not yet been completed, with current studies limited to the treatment of allergic asthma.1732”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1732]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“AR and NAR are risk factors for developing asthma. This has been demonstrated in several large epidemiological studies (Table X.A.3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergic rhinitis as a risk factor for asthma
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In adulthood, the development of asthma in patients with rhinitis is often independent of allergy, whereas in childhood, it is frequently associated with allergy,597,1785 as almost all asthma in children is allergic.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergic rhinitis as a risk factor for asthma
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Cetirizine also has bronchodilatory effects which are significant both as monotherapy as well as in combination with albuterol.1803”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1803] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Adults and children with asthma and documented concomitant AR experience more asthma-related hospitalizations and doctors’ visits and also incur higher asthma drug costs than adults with asthma alone1759-1764 (Table X.A.2).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Asthma
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1759] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1760] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1761] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1762] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1763] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1764] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“another study evaluates omalizumab as an adjunct to SCIT,1403 with both studies showing a reduction in symptoms as well as an improvement in QOL measures”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While analysis of the entire group found no significant difference between cetirizine-treated and placebo-treated patients, subgroup analysis revealed approximately 50% reduced risk of developing asthma among certizine-treated patients with grass pollen and HDM sensitivities.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1807] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“LTRAs (montelukast and zafirlukast) have demonstrated benefit for the treatment of both asthma and AR, consistent with efficacy in addressing inflammation in the “unified airway”1813 (Table X.A.4-3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1813] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harm: Pharmacotherapy other than systemic steroids—minimal harm with rare mild adverse events such as drowsiness. No serious adverse events reported in the studies reviewed.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Alternatively, a 2013 systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of INCS for asthmatics with concomitant AR demonstrated improvements in asthma outcomes with the use of INCS compared to placebo, but a lack of further improvement with INCS as an addition to inhaled corticosteroids.1296”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1296] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Since then, it has been shown that very little intranasally administered corticosteroid reaches the lung (approximately 2%), suggesting this effect on the lower airway may be related to its intranasal effects.1788,1811”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two studies have specifically examined the association between RARS and AR, with a focus on potentially altered innate immunity. The results of these 2 studies are conflicting.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as well as reduced development of asthma in patients with AR only.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“AIT (both SCIT and SLIT) has demonstrated benefit in concomitant AR and asthma, with decreased symptoms, rescue medication use, and bronchial hyperresponsiveness”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Benefit: Decreased asthma exacerbations, decreased symptom scores, and improvement in disease-specific QOL in patients with coexisting asthma and AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Local site reactions are common and there is potential for anaphylactic events with any form of AIT.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“ISAAC studies support the frequent association of AR with itchy-watery eyes, reporting that ocular symptoms affect approximately 33% to 50% of children with AR1883”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Conjunctivitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1883] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Their review found 4 studies that supported an association between allergy and CRSsNP and 5 that did not.1854”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1854] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Again, the evidence was conflicting. Ten studies supported an association while 7 did not. One study had equivocal findings.1854”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1854] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Li et al.1855 examined the association between atopy and CRSwNP and concluded that there was no correlation between atopic status and disease severity.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1855] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“ISAAC reported the prevalence of AD symptoms in 256,410 children aged 6 to 7 years in 90 centers from 37 countries, and 458,623 children aged 13 to 14 years in 153 centers from 56 countries.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Atopic dermatitis (AD)
plainn = 256,410- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Those living in the more humid coastal location demonstrated increased mold and pollen sensitization but no significant correlation with adenoid hypertrophy was found.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1936] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The AR-only group had a higher prevalence of asthma (p = 0.037) and “itchy nose” (0.017).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1934] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“children with both AH and AR had a higher frequency of persistent rhinitis (p < 0.05), moderate/severe rhinitis (p = 0.005), and nasal congestion (p = 0.001) than those with AR alone.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1934] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Masieri et al.1943 reported Th1 gene expression in non-allergic adenoid tissue, Th1 and Th2 gene expression in adenoid tissue in those with AR treated with antihistamines, and a down regulation in Th1 and Th2 gene expression in adenoid tissue from children treated with SLIT.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1943] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One study evaluating the persistence of tolerance for apple after birch immunotherapy demonstrated that some patients had an increased apple tolerance for up to 30 months after immunotherapy. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the immunotherapy and control groups.1927”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Food allergy and pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1927] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They reported 70.3% of the adenotonsillar hypertrophy group had a positive SPT compared to 10% of the control group (p = 0.04); however, they included SPTs for foods (highest positive allergen subgroup) and latex.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1940] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They concluded that there was not a statistically significant association with adenoid size (p = 0.195) and a negative correlation with tonsil size (p = 0.045).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1938] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Dogru et al.1934 also reported an increased sensitization to Alternaria in children with both AH and AR compared to AR alone (p = 0.032), although a statistical correction for multiple variables was not described.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1934] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They found an association between allergy and AH in children aged 8 to 14 years (p = 0.0043), but not for children aged 1 to 7 years (p = 0.34).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1947] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They do not define the standard of care or medical necessity.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the quality of each study was evaluated to receive a level based on the Oxford LOE (level 1a to 5).5”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this document is not a clinical practice guideline (CPG) or a meta-analysis”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The recommendations for AR diagnostic modalities and treatment contained herein rely directly on this evidence, with a clear delineation of the benefit, harm, and cost considerations that supported each recommendation level.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Abstract > Conclusion:
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The quote only partly states this claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reference lists of all identified studies were examined to ensure all relevant studies were captured.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ovid MEDLINE® (1947-September 2016), EMBASE (1974-September 2016), and Cochrane Review databases were included.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“an aggregate grade of evidence was produced for the topic based on the guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics Steering Committee on Quality Improvement and Management (AAP SCQIM)6”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a meta-analysis was not performed on the data included in this document”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“all included studies in EBR and EBRR topic sections are presented in a standardized table format”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Initial topic development and writing by a primary author or team of authors, followed by a stepwise anonymous iterative review process for over 100 AR topics held this process to extremely high standards.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The recommendations in this document are evidence-based.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More than 100 international authors from various specialties utilized a structured review process to evaluate the evidence related to AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“expert opinion receives lower value (Table II.A-1)”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this ICAR:AR document is formulated with the utmost reliance on published evidence”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“A definitive diagnosis is obtained by objective demonstration of the causal relationship between rhinitis and the work environment through a nasal provocation test (NPT) with the suspected agent(s) in the laboratory, which is considered the gold standard for diagnosis.84,85”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the draft ICAR:AR was circulated to all authors. The final ICAR:AR manuscript was produced when all authors agreed upon the literature and final recommendations.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > ICAR statement development
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Symptoms associated with viral rhinitis include clear rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, and often, fever.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The revised topic section was then subsequently reviewed by a second reviewer. Initial authors of the topic and both assigned reviewers agreed upon all changes before each section was considered appropriate to proceed into the final ICAR statement stage.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Iterative review
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“External peer review, with 20 reviewers, was also undertaken for the final ICAR:AR document”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > ICAR statement development
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this document may not present every study published on every topic”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Limitations of methods and data presentation
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In contrast, smoke induced-rhinitis typically does not require sensitization, although there has been report of potential allergenic compounds in smoke.129”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [129] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Smoke-induced rhinitis does not appear to be driven by IgE-mediated hypersensitivity.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In adult viral rhinitis, the incidence is 2 to 3 episodes per year.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The content of the first draft from each topic section was reviewed by a first reviewer, and all changes were agreed upon by the initial author and this first reviewer.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Iterative review
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“because each topic author individually performed the literature search for his/her assigned topic, search results may demonstrate some inherent variability despite specific and detailed search instructions”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Limitations of methods and data presentation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“each evidence-based recommendation took into account the aggregate grade of evidence along with the balance of benefit, harm, and costs”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Topic development
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“It occurs in about 22% of pregnancies139”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [139] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“although symptoms may occur at any time, it typically starts after the second month of pregnancy and is most severe in the second trimester.26,140”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Symptoms suggestive of a noninfectious etiology include nasal itching and sneezing, while findings of mucosal inflammation and rhinorrhea may be present in either infectious or noninfectious rhinitis.26”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [26] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Interestingly, although active smokers are likely to have an elevated serum IgE, they exhibit a lower skin test reactivity to allergens than allergic nonsmokers.130”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [130] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The responsible organisms of viral rhinitis can be rhinovirus, adenovirus, influenza virus, and parainfluenza virus.81”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [81] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most viral rhinitis is self-limiting within 4 to 5 days, with prolonged symptoms lasting longer than 2 weeks suggestive of a noninfectious etiology or conversion to bacterial infection.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Hormonal changes, such as increased progesterone, estrogen, prolactin, vasoactive intestinal peptide, and/or placental growth hormone have been implicated,143,144 but there is little evidence to support this theory.145”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The first draft of each large ICAR:AR portion (ie, Evaluation and Diagnosis, Pharmacotherapy, Immunotherapy, etc.) then underwent additional reviews for consistency and understanding using a group of 6 to 8 authors.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > ICAR statement development
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“each section underwent a 2-stage online iterative review process using 2 independent reviewers”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Iterative review
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For certain topics, the literature is extensive and only high-quality studies or systematic reviews are listed.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Methods > Limitations of methods and data presentation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The symptoms of rhinitis of pregnancy, like those of AR, include rhinorrhea and nasal congestion, which can be prominent and prolonged.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These responses are non-IgE-mediated by a reflex response which is often termed neurogenic inflammation.115”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [115] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“A subset of these individuals involved in high-level single-exposure incidents may develop persistent symptoms. This phenomenon has been described as RUDS when only rhinitis symptoms are present, and Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome when asthma-like symptoms are present.116,117”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There are many chemicals with which specific occupations are closely associated, though household chemicals and sport/leisure exposures (ie, chlorine-induced rhinitis in swimmers113) may play a role as well.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [113] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Nasal discomfort, discharge, congestion, headaches, and sometimes epistaxis may also be present.112”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [112] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While specific IgE production toward chemicals causing respiratory allergy is seen, evidence to show symptoms related to chemical exposure without concomitant rise in IgE has also been documented.121”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [121] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Other physiologic phenomena occurring during pregnancy that may contribute to increased nasal congestion or obstruction include vasodilation, progesterone-induced smooth muscle relaxation, and a massive expansion of the circulating blood volume, which may contribute to increased nasal vascular pooling.146”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [146] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A prominent feature not shared with AR is anosmia, a frequent finding in NARES patients.175”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [175] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, levels of MCP-1 and RANTES were significantly higher in the nasal fluid of NARES compared to PAR subjects, which again, correlated with nasal symptom scores and density of eosinophilia in these patients.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Finally, direct alcohol utilization has also been associated with a trend toward developing SPT positivity,171 and with increased serum total IgE (tIgE) levels.172”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Saline lavage using hypertonic saline has been demonstrated to be effective without obvious deleterious effects on the fetus.151”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [151] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is the most common type of inflammatory NAR, and was first described in 1981 by Jacobs et al.174”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [174] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“NARES is diagnosed by careful history, findings on physical exam (pale, boggy turbinates, like those found in PAR patients), and negative skin or in vitro allergy testing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“NARES usually occurs in isolation but may be associated with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD), characterized by asthma, nasal polyps, and NSAID intolerance.173”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [173] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While rhinitis may frequently be observed as part of systemic IgE-mediated food allergy reaction, it is rarely the only presenting symptom.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“NARES patients report symptoms that are typical, although often more pronounced, than those of PAR. These include, nasal congestion, profuse aqueous rhinorrhea, sneezing, and nasal and ocular pruritis.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Specifically, NARES is characterized by elevated nasal fluid levels of tryptase (also seen in PAR patients) and eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) (markedly increased solely in NARES).181”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [181] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Alcohol-induced nasal symptoms are about twice as common in females as in males,165”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [165] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The assessed prevalence of this disorder ranges from 5% to 17%, and it affects up to one-half of pollen-allergic patients.159-161”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge study of 480 children, 185 children (39%) experienced ocular and upper respiratory symptoms, but only 5% had symptoms confined to the upper respiratory tract alone.158”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [158] source
plainn = 185- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Cytologic examination in NARES reveals the presence of prominent eosinophilia, usually 10% to 20%173 on nasal smear, with a diagnostic criterion (described by some) of more than 25% eosinophilia.176”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [173] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [176]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Nasal congestion is the predominant symptom, and red wine is the most common alcoholic beverage to elicit symptoms.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This method of treatment is known to decrease neutrophil and eosinophil chemotaxis, reduce mast cell and basophil mediator release, and result in decreased mucosal edema and local inflammation.187”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [187] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These symptoms may be perennial, persistent, or seasonal, and are typically elicited by defined triggers, such as cold air, climate changes (ie, temperature, humidity, barometric pressure), strong smells, tobacco smoke, changes in sexual hormone levels, environmental pollutants, physical exercise, and alcohol.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Mirza et al.212 measured the relative airflow of the 6 nasal chambers at 15-minute intervals for 6 hours across 4 different age groups (n = 60) using liquid crystal thermography. They found that the proportion of subjects exhibiting the classic nasal cycle decreased with age, being lowest in the 70-year-old to 85-year-old group.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [212] source
plaincorrelationaln = 60- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Non-allergic rhinopathy is primarily found in adults, with a female-to-male ratio of 2:1 to 3:1.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On physical exam, the nasal mucosa usually appears normal, but may show signs of erythema and clear rhinorrhea.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“It is possible that decreased sympathetic tone with unopposed parasympathetic stimulation results in a rise in glandular activity in the nasal cavity, leading to increased nasal drainage.202,205”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Patients often complain of dryness and crusting, although the hallmark complaint of ENS patients is paradoxical nasal congestion that may be so severe that they feel as if they are suffocating.223”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [223] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Individuals with LAR suffer from typical allergic symptoms upon allergen exposure, but display a lack of systemic IgE sensitization.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While systemic allergy testing (skin or in vitro testing) is typically sufficient to differentiate between AR and non-allergic rhinopathy, a diagnosis of LAR may be considered in the setting of negative systemic testing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Rodriguez et al.202 used a questionnaire to demonstrate that clear rhinorrhea increases with age. Results showed that only 33% of the younger age group respondents (n = 76, mean age 19 years) regularly reported clear anterior drainage as compared to 74% of the older age group respondents (n = 82, mean age 86 years).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [202] source
boosteddirectn = 76- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Lindemann et al.199 measured these values in 80 healthy patients and found them to be significantly lower in older patients (age 61 to 84 years) than in younger patients (age 20 to 40 years). The authors attributed the difference to an increase in intranasal volume (INV) from age-related atrophy of the nasal mucosa, with INV measured by minimal cross-sectional areas and volumes of each nasal Cavit”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [199] source
plaindirectn = 80- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In a prior study of central responses to olfactory stimuli, subjects with non-allergic rhinopathy underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging following exposure to different odors (vanilla and hickory smoke). Findings included increased blood flow to the olfactory cortex, leading to the hypothesis of an altered neurologic response in non-allergic rhinopathy.195,196”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Ho et al.211 demonstrated a decline in MCC effectiveness with age in 90 healthy subjects aged 11 to 90 years. Subjects over 40 years of age had a slower ciliary beat frequency, increased microtubule disarrangement, and longer MCC times on saccharin testing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [211] source
boostedcorrelationaln = 90- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Non-allergic rhinopathy is a diagnosis of exclusion, and other etiologic factors for rhinopathy must be evaluated. These include CRS, NARES, AERD, infectious rhinitis, anatomical abnormalities, RM, drug side effects, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhea, and rhinitis of pregnancy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“ENS occurs most frequently after total turbinate excision, but also with lesser procedures such as submucosal cautery or resection, laser therapy, and cryosurgery.223”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [223] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Most turbinate surgery has successful outcomes, with ENS occurring after a very small percentage of sinonasal procedures.221,222”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Non-allergic rhinopathy represents a chronic disease with primary symptoms of rhinorrhea.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“An increase in INV with age has also been demonstrated by Loftus et al.215 using 3D-volumetric analysis of computed tomography (CT) scans from subjects without sinonasal pathology. Mean INV was 15.73 mL in the 20 to 30 year age group (n = 22), 17.30 mL in the 40 to 50 year age group (n = 20), and 18.38 mL in the over 70 year age group (n = 20).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [215] source
boosteddirectn = 22- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both atrophic rhinitis and ENS patients complain of nasal congestion.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Diagnosis is made based on history, physical exam, and the cotton test, where a piece of slightly moist cotton is placed in the nasal cavity for 10 to 30 minutes with alleviation of symptoms, validating the diagnosis.223”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [223] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, certain surgeons have identified patients with unilateral ENS symptoms while their normal sensing side looks like a mirror image in terms of absent inferior turbinate tissue.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Differences in nerve recovery after surgery may explain why only some patients develop ENS despite identical turbinate surgeries.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Hyposmia, epistaxis, and facial pain or pressure may also occur.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Previously referred to as Wegener’s disease, granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) is an idiopathic disease characterized by necrotizing and granulomatous inflammation of the upper and lower airways (85%), glomerulonephritis (75%) and systemic vasculitis.237-239”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Primary atrophic rhinitis runs a protracted course.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [231] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Atrophic rhinitis presents as thick, adherent nasal crusting, nasal congestion, foul odor, and atrophy of mucosal and turbinate surfaces, with severe cases having complete absence of recognizable anatomic landmarks, septal perforations, or saddle nose deformity.231-233”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“GPA predominantly affects small to medium sized arteries and vein walls.240”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [240] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms, physical findings, radiological examinations, laboratory tests (positive c-ANCA [anti-nuclear cytoplasmic antibody] in 60–90%), and biopsy of affected tissue for pathological examination.237,238,240”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Allergy testing will, however, be negative or not clinically relevant.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ENS results from iatrogenic removal of turbinate tissue and is not associated with a bacterial infection whereas atrophic rhinitis results from a chronic, often idiopathic inflammatory process associated with bacterial infection that progresses to resorption of turbinate tissue.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Nasal mucosa disruption may lead to anosmia while tissue necrosis with secondary infection may lead to cacosmia.236”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [236] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“GPA affects both men and women in a similar proportion, being frequently diagnosed in the fourth to sixth decades of life.240”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [240] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To differentiate AR [allergic rhinitis] from atrophic rhinitis, it should be noted that AR is an immunological response to a benign substance, the allergen, that manifests primarily as nasal inflammation.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“AR is IgE-dependent235 and characterized by sneezing, clear rhinorrhea, watery eyes, and nasal and ocular pruritus.1”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Atrophic rhinitis is a chronic, degenerative condition characterized by inflammation and atrophy of the nasal and paranasal mucosa.231”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [231] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“It has also been reported that depression and anxiety are prevalent among ENS patients.230”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [230] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Atrophic rhinitis presents as thick, adherent nasal crusting, nasal congestion, foul odor, and atrophy of mucosal and turbinate surfaces, with severe cases having complete absence of recognizable anatomic landmarks, septal perforations, or saddle nose deformity.231-233”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Limited forms of GPA involving only the head and neck may also be seen.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Not only does turbinate resection remove nasal mucosa and consequently airflow sensing thermoreceptors, such surgery causes nerve damage that if improperly healed, results in failure to return to a normal physiologic state.221”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [221] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Secondary atrophic rhinitis is also associated with a bacterial infection, but Staphylococcus aureus, Proteus mirabilis, and Escherichia coli are the more common pathogens, with Klebsiella ozaenae rarely isolated.231”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [231] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Nasal symptoms include obstruction, rhinorrhea, recurrent epistaxis, crusting, and pain over the nasal dorsum.237,241”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Atrophic rhinitis patients suffer from heavy crusting whereas ENS patients exhibit only minor crusting or no crusting.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Previously known as Churg-Strauss Syndrome, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is a rare small-sized vessel vasculitis with a prevalence of 1.3 cases per 100,000,247 typically diagnosed in patients age 30 to 50 years.236”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The involvement of the upper respiratory tract epithelium is infrequent236 and nasal symptoms are nonspecific: obstruction, epistaxis, nasal pain, epiphora, and anosmia.237”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The diagnosis of sinonasal sarcoidosis is based on the clinical findings with either polypoid changes or characteristic yellowish submucosal nodularity.238”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [238] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Rituximab, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, may be an effective therapy in refractory or relapsing c-ANCA vasculitis,246 although additional study is needed.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [246] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“SLE predominantly affects women (10:1) with an incidence of 5.6 per 100,000 people.260”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [260] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Mucosal lesions are seen in 9% to 18% of cases, with oral, nasal, and pharyngeal mucosa being commonly affected.260”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [260] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The skin of the nose and nasal vestibule can also be involved in the skin rashes.237”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [237] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Sarcoidosis is a chronic multisystem disorder characterized by bilateral hilar adenopathy, pulmonary infiltration, ocular, and skin lesions.238,253”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“AR may be associated with comorbid rhinosinusitis, although whether AR increases the risk of rhinosinusitis is debatable.1”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease that can affect any body system.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Submucosal yellow nodules representative of intramucosal granulomas may be identified in mucosal biopsies, while nasal polyps, rhinophyma, and septal perforations have also been reported.238,256”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The primary treatment for sarcoidosis is systemic steroids, chloroquine, immunosuppressants, and lung-transplantation.237,238,256,257”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The diagnosis requires a detailed medical history, a physical examination, and laboratory tests (anti-nuclear antibody [ANA] or anti-double-stranded DNA), including a complete blood count, chemistry panel, and urinalysis.236,261”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The emergence of biological therapies has increased the therapeutic options to treat refractory organ-threatening sarcoidosis, with monoclonal anti-TNF (tumor necrosis factor) agents (infliximab) being the most promising.259”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [259]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Tissue for diagnosis is usually obtained by transbronchial-lung biopsy254 or nasal biopsy, as well as from skin lesions, minor salivary glands, and lymph nodes.238”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of note, these conditions are not mutually exclusive and there may be an association between rhinosinusitis and AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Treatment includes prednisone, cyclophosphamide, or methotrexate.237,238,245”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“More commonly seen in young and middle-aged adults,254 females more frequently than males, and African-Americans,255 a prevalence of 50 per 100,000 individuals has been reported.236”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“EGPA is often associated with the presence of p-ANCA.247”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [247] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Therapy with corticosteroids, immunomodulators (prasterone, vitamin D, hydroxychloroquine), or immunosuppressants (azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, or mycophenolate) is prescribed for symptom control,238,262 while belimumab is a recent biological (anti-BAFF [B-cell activating factor] monoclonal antibody) to potentially treat SLE.263”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [263] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ARS may be viral or bacterial.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis differential diagnosis
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The immunologic processes underlying IgE-mediated AR are similar to those of other atopic conditions and involve activation of the adaptive immune system.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The presence of elevated levels of IgE in nasal secretions has been demonstrated in non-allergic rhinopathy as well, which potentially further highlights a significance of the IgE-IgE receptor cascade in driving the disease process of rhinitis.287”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [287] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Th1 profile is responsible for defense against intra-cellular pathogens, while Th2 responses are implicated in the defense against parasitic infections as well as the IgE-mediated eosinophilic inflammation of allergy.272”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [272] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“IgE plays a central and defining role in the pathophysiology of acute allergic reactions as well as chronic atopic disease.281”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [281] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“TSLP also promotes recruitment of eosinophils and enhanced activity of basophils and mast cells.272”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [272] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although IgE in plasma is short-lived, IgE that is receptor-bound remains attached to these cells for weeks or months.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Future allergen exposure results in crosslinking of IgE on the surface of mast cells and basophils causing degranulation, release of inflammatory mediators such as histamine, and the classic symptoms of AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This pattern of atopic disease progression is well-known and supported by prospective studies.273”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [273] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Development of an IgE-secreting B cell requires the presence of IL-4 or IL-13, which induce class switching via upregulation of ε-germline gene transcription and clonal expansion, as well as interaction between CD40 ligand on the T-cell surface and CD40 on the B-cell surface, which promotes B-cell activation and the production of IgE.279”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [279] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The immune response leading to IgE production in AR is often a systemic phenomenon, and patients with AR demonstrate evidence of systemic atopy.269,270”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In individuals with AR, exposure to specific allergens results in the production of allergen-specific IgE, which then binds to effector cells such as mast cells and basophils via the high-affinity receptor FcεRI.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“IL-4 binds STAT-6 on the Th0 cell, activating the master switch GATA-3.272”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [272] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ILCs are a family of effector cells that are important for protection against infiltrating pathogens and restoration of tissue integrity.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pathophysiologic mechanisms of inflammatory airway disease are related to large physiologic networks that influence host-environment interactions.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Epithelial cells not only act as a physical barrier toward inhaled allergens, but also actively contribute to airway inflammation by detecting and responding to environmental factors.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“LAR may affect more than 47% of children and adults previously classified as NAR,290-295 and persists throughout the years with a low rate of conversion to clinical AR.296-298”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In allergic disease, the nasal epithelium seems to be in a permanently activated state,326 potentially as a consequence of the inability to switch off the activation response.327”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Diagnosis of LAR is based on demonstration of a positive response to NPT and/or the detection of nasal sIgE and/or a positive basophil activation test (BAT) in the absence of systemic atopy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pathophysiology of LAR is complex and not completely understood.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“NPT studies have demonstrated the existence of characteristic immediate/early and late-phases of the allergic response in LAR patients with local production of sIgE, mast cell, and eosinophil activation, with mucosal secretion of tryptase and ECP.306,307”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Three major subsets have been defined based on their phenotype and functional similarities to Th1 (ILC1), Th2 (ILC2), and Th17 (ILC3) cells.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“It is commonly accepted that AR is primarily an IgE-driven response.319”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [319] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“ILCs do not express antigen-specific T-cell receptors, but can react promptly to “danger signals” and produce an array of cytokines that direct ensuing immune responses.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A recent study showed that 83% of LAR subjects sensitized to Olea europaea pollen responded to NPT with nOle e 1 (the most significant allergen of Olea europea), demonstrating that purified allergens can also induce an allergic response with secretion of ECP.308”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > IgE-mediated allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [308] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The nasal epithelium is the first structure to encounter inhaled aeroallergens.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Non–IgE-mediated inflammation in allergic rhinitis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main difference in mucosal components is the absence of smooth muscles in the upper airways as compared to the lower airways, and the lack of extensive subepithelial capillaries, arterial systems, and venous cavernous sinusoids in the lower airways as compared to the upper airways.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The role of preferential mouth breathing in the development of asthma is unclear.346”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [346] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Dendritic cells are professional APCs that are directly related to AR, with increased numbers and concentrations of IgE in atopic disease.360”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [360] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“New targeted treatments that focus on (subgroup) type 2 elements, such as anti-IgE antibodies, anti-IL-5 (mepolizumab), and anti-IL-4/IL-13 (dupilumab) are currently used in asthma, but are not currently approved for use in the upper airways.342”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [342] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Basal epithelial cells are also present, attached to the basement membrane (lamina reticularis), and have an epithelial stem cell function.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Increases in CD34+ cells capable of eosinophil differentiation, as well as other circulatory mediators (IL-5, eotaxin, and cysteinyl leukotrienes), are associated with impaired lung function parameters and enhanced mucosal inflammation in asthmatic patients,353 and react to local corticosteroids in AR.354”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, CD4+ memory T-cells and gamma/delta-T-cells are increased in PAR patients’ mucosa.364”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [364] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, many studies focusing on cell types in allergic diseases, including recently identified cells such as type 2 ILCs, Th17 cells, and Th22 cells, have been mostly restricted to investigations of peripheral blood cells, not tissue biopsies.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the submucosa there are vessels, mucus glands, fibroblasts, and some inflammatory cells.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Moreover, after nasal application, deposits of radioactive-labeled allergen can be found in the digestive tract but not in the respiratory tract.347”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [347] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although there is a relationship between postnasal drip and coughing, no direct association has been proven between overproduction of nasal secretions and bronchial hyperreactivity.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, different tissue sites such as sinus mucosa, polyp tissue, or inferior turbinates show a variety of different infiltrating immune and inflammatory cells.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Treatment with anti-IL-5 and other interleukins relevant in the eosinophilic pathway has been shown to be effective in asthma, with some beneficial results in eosinophilic upper airway disease.342”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [342] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“T-helper subset imbalance and production of typical Th2 cytokines,362 along with increased expression of GATA-3,363 is generally seen in AR nasal mucosa.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cellular inflammatory infiltrates
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“New systemic treatment options make understanding of the relationship between upper and lower airways even more important.337”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Unified airway concept
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [337] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Bisgaard et al.449 found lower bacterial diversity was associated to higher risk of allergic sensitization (p = 0.003) and AR (p = 0.007).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Microbiome
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [449] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They produce IL-17A, IL-17F, IL-22, TNF-α, and IL-21.409”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cytokine network and soluble mediators
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [409] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Upon allergen exposure, there is significantly higher infiltration of inflammatory cells, and increased levels of cytokines (such as IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13) in the nasal epithelium of allergic compared to non-allergic patients.182”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Histologic and epithelial changes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [182] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Birch pollen has been found to rapidly bind to Bet v 1–binding proteins in sensitized nasal epithelium, and is transported through a lipid raft and caveolar-dependent process before binding to mast cells in the lamina propria.433-435”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Histologic and epithelial changes
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“While epithelial remodeling is a key feature of CRS (epithelial hyperplasia, goblet cell hyperplasia, and squamous metaplasia)418-420 and asthma (epithelial desquamation, subepithelial fibrosis, and smooth muscle hypertrophy), remodeling in AR is less marked.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Histologic and epithelial changes
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A more recent report based on NHANES (2005-2006), presented population prevalence figures in which two-thirds were over the age of 20 years, and showed the lifetime prevalence of physician-diagnosed hay fever was 11.3%, with 6.6% having symptoms in the last 12 months.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Prevalence of allergic rhinitis in adults
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In general, limited studies have found no significant increase in basement membrane thickness, subepithelial fibrosis, goblet cell hyperplasia, or blood vessel volume and surface density,415,421,422 though increased vascular permeability was noted.423”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Histologic and epithelial changes
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Epithelial response to allergens differs from healthy individuals in that allergic patients do not mount as robust an epithelial defense response to allergens, leading to increased penetration of allergens.432”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Histologic and epithelial changes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [432] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“They are a major source of the inflammatory cytokines macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF)402 and nerve growth factor (NGF).403”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cytokine network and soluble mediators
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, AR is a type 2–mediated disease, characterized by important regulatory cytokines such as IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Pathophysiology and mechanisms of allergic rhinitis > Cytokine network and soluble mediators
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Additionally, some reports suggest that exposure to urban pollutants may be associated with increased risk for developing AR in children.476”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [476] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Rhinoconjunctivitis has been reported to be slightly more common among boys than girls in the 6-year to 7-year-old age group, with the opposite tendency seen in the 13-year to 14-year-old age group.474”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Incidence and prevalence of allergic rhinitis in children
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [474] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Data from the second survey (ISAAC Phase Three 1999–2004) state that the worldwide prevalence of current rhinoconjunctivitis in the 6-year to 7-year-old age group was 8.3% (range between countries, 1.8% to 24.2%) and in the 13-year to 14-year age group was 15.1% (range, 4.5% to 45.1%).472”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Incidence and prevalence of allergic rhinitis in children
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [472] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the Swiss Study of Air Pollution and Lung Disease in Adults (SAPALDIA), conducted around the same time as the ECRHS, the prevalence of self-reported “nasal allergies including hay fever” in adults aged 18 to 60 years was 17.9%, and the prevalence of current symptoms (“hay fever this year or last year”) was 14.2%.457”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Prevalence of allergic rhinitis in adults
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [457] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Colder climates present at northern latitudes tend toward shorter growing seasons, and many allergenic species do not thrive in extreme northern climates.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [480]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In the Pollution and Asthma Risk: an Infant Study (PARIS) birth cohort, 9.1% of the 18-month-old children had AR-like symptoms with a strong association with atopy and sensitization to inhalant allergens.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Incidence and prevalence of allergic rhinitis in children
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [466] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Five GWASs on AR (or hay fever) have been published as of September 2016, as summarized in Table VI.A.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“AR is well-known to run in families, and 1 of the strongest risk factors is the presence of disease in first-degree family members.483”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [483] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast, Bousquet et al.456 skin-tested a random sample of Belgian subjects and reported a positive rate in Belgium of 16.4% (one of the lowest of 15 countries examined).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Geographic variation of allergic rhinitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [456] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This could be due to inadequate statistical power related to small sample sizes, inconsistent phenotype definition, or lack of true disease association.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Genetics
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“and Kim et al.521 proposed exposure to spider mites as a risk factor for AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Inhalant allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [521] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, pets may be a relevant source of mites, as their fur is often settled by mites; this association may confound AR evaluation and treatment.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Inhalant allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Numerous studies have evaluated the association between early exposure to animal dander and subsequent development of AR, with conflicting results (Table VI.B-3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Inhalant allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Additionally, airborne particles, including diesel fuel exhaust, are also able to carry allergens, thus potentially increasing the spread of allergens or the duration of their exposure.574”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Pollution
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [574] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Environmental air pollutants contain several compounds; however, most studies have primarily focused on particulate matter <10 μm (PM10), particulate matter <2.5 μm (PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and ozone (O3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Pollution
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“and neutral studies (reporting that early exposure to animal dander is not associated with AR468,517,518,520,524,528,530,532,536,538,539,543-554).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Inhalant allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For example, pollution may damage the nasal mucosa and impair MCC, thereby facilitating the access of inhaled allergens to cells of the immune system.576”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Pollution
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [576] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ambient humidity may an intrinsic risk factor, but high moisture is also associated with increased level of mites, as mites grow in presence of elevated moisture.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Inhalant allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In another RCT, restricted diet during pregnancy (cow’s milk-free and egg-free diet from week 28 to delivery) was associated with a small but statistically significant lower mean gestational weight gain and did not protect the offspring from atopy.571”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Food allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [571] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The pooled results of 2 trials suggest that maternal food antigen avoidance may be associated with a higher risk of preterm birth and a possible adverse effect on mean birth weight without beneficial effects on AR development in the children.570,571”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Food allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Home moisture level, which is closely and positively associated with the presence of fungal allergens in the home, may be a confounding factor in interpreting the evidence on fungal exposure and AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Inhalant allergens (in utero and early childhood exposure)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Eriksson et al.124 found that while smoking was associated with a high prevalence of chronic rhinitis in both men and women, it was correlated with a low prevalence of AR in men.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Tobacco smoke
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [124] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Katotomichelakis et al.605 evaluated 163 patients (both smokers and nonsmokers) receiving sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) for AR and found that, regardless of tobacco status, total symptom scores and QOL questionnaires equally improved.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Tobacco smoke
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [605] source
plainn = 163- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Additionally, Wright et al.597 found that while there was no significant association between secondhand smoke exposure and AR, 63% of asthmatics born to heavy smokers developed rhinitis in the first 6 months, vs 43% of asthmatics whose mothers did not smoke.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Tobacco smoke
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [597] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, they did note a positive association between increased levels of O3 and an AR diagnosis in industrial areas only; O3 was also significantly associated with the development of new sensitizations to outdoor allergens, which may explain the mechanism for the related increase in AR prevalence.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Pollution
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [579] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Hur et al.594 also systematically evaluated the relationship between secondhand smoke and AR and that meta-analysis of studies in adults showed an association between passive smoke and AR, while a similar analysis of pediatric studies did not.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Tobacco smoke
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [594] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Keil et al.596 found that while passive smoke was not significantly related to AR, it was strongly associated with allergic sensitization and asthma symptoms in children with a genetic predisposition (at least 1 or more atopic parents).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Tobacco smoke
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [596] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, during the study period, this association seemed to weaken with an OR estimate for AR among subjects with low SES changing from 0.79 to 0.92.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Socioeconomic factors
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“On the contrary, cross-sectional studies reported inconsistent associations between cat or dog exposure and sensitization as well as the subsequent development of atopic diseases later in life562,640”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Alternatively, early pet exposure may induce immune tolerance and thus reduce the chance of development of allergic disease.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Thus, among children born in the Western world before 1970 high SES was a risk factor, but among children born in the same regions after 1990 low SES, particularly early in life, seemed to be a risk factor614”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Socioeconomic factors
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [614] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, pet owners are frequently contaminated with pet allergens, leading to generalized exposures via social contact. Therefore, a non-exposed reference population does not exist, limiting our ability to clearly understand the relationship between exposure to pet allergens and development of AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The general consensus of these studies is that AR has a significant negative impact on general and disease-specific QOL, and that the successful treatment of AR by any of the aforementioned therapies leads to the improvement of symptoms and QOL.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Additionally, a RCT of acupuncture vs medical therapy showed that the improvement in QOL occurred in both groups, but the degree of improvement was larger in the acupuncture group.680”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [680] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Breastfeeding is associated with several beneficial effects on mother and child health and therefore has been recommended for all infants.619”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [619] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The timing of pet allergen exposure early in life may be an important factor for the maturing immune system.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the protective effect was not seen in children with a family history of atopic disease (OR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.58).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [623] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A meta-analysis of 32 studies reported a lower prevalence of AR among subjects with furred pets in cross-sectional studies, and less asthma among cat-exposed subjects.639”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [639] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, studies may often fail to account for confounding variables such as a family history of pet allergy which, in turn, may predispose likely atopic children to pet avoidance.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Risk factors for allergic rhinitis > Protective factors against allergic rhinitis VI.G.1. Breastfeeding
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Additionally AR has been associated with worse sleep fragmentation711,712 and snoring.713,714”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Estimates of the annual direct cost of AR range from $2 billion to $5 billion, with more than one-half of the AR direct costs coming from prescription medications.760-762”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In Europe, the total societal cost of AR and its comorbidities in 2002 was estimated at 355.06 Euros per patient per month.755”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [755] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In terms of the overall economic burden of illness, AR ranks fifth among chronic conditions in the United States.759”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [759] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The total burden for AR lies not only in the impairment of physical and social functioning, but also in the financial burden, which is greater when its role in comorbid conditions such as asthma and rhinosinusitis are taken into account.754-756”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Compared with matched controls, patients with AR have an almost 2-fold increase in medication costs and a 1.8-fold increase in visits to a healthcare provider.756,764,765”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Health impairments associated with AR are often not severe enough to cause absenteeism, but they do interfere with cognitive functioning, resulting in fatigue and an impaired ability to learn, concentrate, and make decisions.770”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [770] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the United States, AR results in 3.5 million lost workdays and 2 million lost school days annually.772”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [772] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Results demonstrate that AR patients have improvements in sleep quality and daytime sleepiness, in addition to sinonasal symptoms and QOL after treatment with nasal corticosteroids705,706,709,710 or a combination of corticosteroids and montelukast.709”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [705]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [706] source
- Not matchedcites [709]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As described in Section VII.A.1, AR may have significant negative effects on QOL with considerable consequences if left untreated.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The general conclusion from the aggregate data is that, like overall and rhinitis-specific QOL, AR negatively impacts sleep QOL and the successful treatment of AR reduces sleep disturbance.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The data on the effects of AR on polysomnogram (PSG) parameters in adults is mixed. Most studies that included PSG analysis found that AR is associated with worsened PSG parameters712,714,716-719; however, 2 level 3b studies found either no difference or a modest change.720,721”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Individual burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [712] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [714] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [716] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [717] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [718] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [719] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a study by Blanc et al.,771 more than one-third of AR patients reported reduced workplace performance.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [771] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In a survey of over 8000 U.S. employees at 47 employer locations, 55% reported AR symptoms for an average of 52.5 days per year. They reported missing 3.6 days of work per year because of AR and reported being unproductive 2.3 hours per workday when symptomatic. The mean total productivity losses (absenteeism and presenteeism) for AR were calculated at $593 per employee per year.769”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [769] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Physical examination alone is poorly predictive and more variable when compared to history taking in the diagnosis of AR, with the average sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values of the patient history higher than those of the physical examination.781”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [781]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Patients may complain of associated symptoms of ocular pruritis, erythema, and/or tearing, oral cavity or pharyngeal pruritis, and wheezing or cough (reactive airway disease and/or asthma).7,26,778”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a study by Hellgren et al.,774 the average productivity loss for all Swedish workers because of absenteeism, presenteeism, and caregiver absenteeism during a year was 5.1 days, of which 2.3 days were accounted for by absenteeism and 2.0 days by presenteeism.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [774] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“However, physical signs suggestive of AR may include mouth-breathing, nasal itching, or a transverse supratip nasal crease, throat clearing, periorbital edema, or “allergic shiners” (dark discoloration of the lower lids and periorbital area).26,777”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“On any given school day in the United States, approximately 10,000 children are absent from school because of AR.773”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [773] source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In an individual patient, the clinical suspicion for a diagnosis of AR is highlighted by the clinical history and often supported by the physical examination. The diagnosis is confirmed by objective testing, which may be performed by various means.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Ameli et al.782 evaluated children with suspected AR, reporting that endoscopic findings of inferior or middle turbinate septal contact was predictive for AR, while pale turbinates were not.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal endoscopy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [782] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Additional associated symptoms may include hyposmia or anosmia, snoring or sleep-disordered breathing, aural congestion or pruritis, and sore throat.778,779”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AR can affect sleep, result in daytime sleepiness, and impair cognition and memory, which may significantly affect the learning process and impact school performance.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The cost of caregiver absenteeism comprised 19% of the mean total costs per year in this study.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [774] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Conversely, Eren et al.783 evaluated a population of adult patients with rhinitis, concluding that findings of nasal endoscopy do not provide a reliable diagnosis of AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal endoscopy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [783] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Central compartment atopic disease (CCAD) represents the recently described association between atopic states and centrally-located inflammation involving the middle/superior turbinates or superior nasal septum.785-787”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal endoscopy
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Examination of the nose may reveal inferior turbinate hypertrophy, congested/edematous nasal mucosa, purplish or bluish nasal mucosa, and clear rhinorrhea.26,218,761,777”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“History taking includes the type of symptoms experienced, timing and duration of symptoms, frequency of symptoms, any environmental exposures eliciting symptoms at home/work/school, and medications or other measures that relieve or exacerbate symptoms.7,26,218,761,777,778”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In addition, past medical history including comorbid conditions such as asthma or obstructive sleep apnea, family history of atopic disorders, social history (ie, pets, work exposures, home environment), and current medications should be obtained.7,26,218,761,777,778”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“AR poses a substantial burden to individuals and society. It can reduce productivity and QOL in affected patients, and contribute to comorbid conditions. This results in a significant impact to the overall health system.773”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [773] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“If only those with children aged 0 to 7 years in their household were included in the analyses, the average number of days for caregiver absenteeism was 3.6 days.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Disease burden > Societal burden
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [774] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Information regarding patient response to self-treatment with over-the-counter medications for AR is also helpful.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Clinical examination History
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT10) evaluates rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma symptoms over the past 4 weeks giving a broader evaluation of seasonal symptom control.804”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [804] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While this is a very reproducible test, it is more technically demanding than SPT, is difficult to perform in young children, and carries a higher risk of adverse reactions.847”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [847] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Wheal size, sensitivity, and reproducibility all differ from 1 device to another826-828; therefore, any healthcare provider performing SPT must thoroughly familiarize themselves with his/her testing device.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“When an antigen is applied to the skin of a sensitized patient, the antigen cross-links IgE antibodies on the surface of cutaneous mast cells resulting in degranulation and release of mediators (including histamine), which leads to the formation of a wheal and flare reaction within 15 to 20 minutes.816,817”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [816]
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [817] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Given the limited depth of penetration, SPT is safe with very rare reports of anaphylaxis and no reported fatalities.818”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [818] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, not all studies use consistent terminology and interpretation of the scoring systems.801”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [801] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“It is reported to be more sensitive than serum testing with the added benefit of lower cost.818,821,822”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Aside from an excellent safety profile, SPT has a reported sensitivity and specificity around 80%.818-820”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Multiple-lancet devices have the advantage of being able to rapidly apply multiple antigens to the skin at 1 time with a more consistent amount of pressure.826,827”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [826]
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [827] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is not inferior to serum or intradermal testing and is less expensive than serum testing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Tests should be applied 2 cm or greater apart as placing them closer to one another can cause cross-contamination.829”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [829] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The confirmation of an IgE-mediated process guides avoidance measures and appropriate pharmacologic therapy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also associated with some discomfort during testing; however, the discomfort is generally less than that experienced during intradermal testing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Patients with only intradermal positive skin tests (SPT negative) did not have a positive RAST nor a positive leukocyte histamine release. In contrast, SPT positivity was associated with positive RAST test and leukocyte histamine release assay.857”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [857] source
plaincorrelationaln = 34- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Harm: The additional risks, including systemic or anaphylactic reactions, of intradermal tests; additional time and discomfort.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These studies suggest marginal increase in sensitivity that may vary based upon the allergen being tested.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Escudero et al.860 found that in rhinitis patients, SPT, intradermal and conjunctival challenge were more sensitive than serum sIgE. All testing methods had the same specificity.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [860]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“If SPT with the multi-test II device was negative, only 17% of subjects had a positive intradermal test that corresponded with clinical history. None of these positive ID tests corresponded with a positive nasal challenge.858”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [858] source
plainn = 97- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Value Judgments: AIT can be initiated from SPT results alone; however, endpoint-based AIT may decrease time to reaching therapeutic dose.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Benefits-Harm Assessment: Benefit over harm when used as a stand-alone diagnostic test. Balance of benefit and harm when used to confirm the results of SPT, as a quantitative diagnostic test or as a vial safety test.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, no correlation between positive intradermal testing and nasal challenge testing was performed in this study.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [859] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, current evidence supports the use of intradermal testing for the diagnosis of AR due to airborne allergens as a stand-alone test, although this form of testing demonstrates no clear superiority over SPT when comparing sensitivity and specificity.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“While IDT endpoints have been shown to correlate with biologically relevant measures, such as basophil histamine release, a clear correlation with other measures, such as in vitro sIgE levels, has not yet been established.852,853”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is unknown whether the type of allergen has an impact on the sensitivity and specificity, as most studies examined used only 1 allergen, but intradermal testing seemed to be least sensitive and specific when mold was being tested.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Disadvantages include the additional risk and time involved in placing intradermal tests.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One randomized placebo-controlled study showed that 14 days of azelastine nasal spray treatment reduced the histamine induced wheal and flare response, and this suppression disappeared by 48 hours after cessation869”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [869] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“As a stand-alone diagnostic test for AR, estimates for sensitivity for intradermal testing range between 60% (95% CI, 31% to 83%) and 79% (95% CI, 63% to 90%), while estimates for specificity range between 68% (95% CI, 49% to 82%) and 69% (95% CI, 52% to 86%).793,833”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“when the clinician was guided by high clinical suspicion, the incidence of positive intradermal testing following negative SPT was 36.9% for indoor allergens”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [859] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Benefit: Generally well tolerated, easy to perform, and a favorable level of sensitivity and specificity when used as a stand-alone diagnostic test.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also more likely that an intradermal test following a negative SPT will be positive when indoor allergens are being tested and least likely to be positive when testing for mold sensitivity.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There appears to be a small gain in sensitivity when intradermal testing is used as a confirmatory test following negative SPT; however, positive intradermal test results in this setting could represent false-positive test results.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Factors affecting the predictive value of intradermal testing include the comparator used and the concentration of allergen used with the intradermal test.855”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [855] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“AIT based upon the MQT results has been shown to be successful, with immune system alterations in line with other skin testing techniques861”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [861] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other limitations of the studies identified for this review include low sample population sizes (the largest included 120 participants), variable study design, and the lack of randomized, controlled trials.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
plainn = 120- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In some cases, it may be preferable to perform in vitro specific IgE testing in patient with skin disease or dermatographism, but this is not based on data or outcomes from controlled studies.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, tIgE is frequently increased in AR, but the clinical utility is modest in common practice.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Satwani et al.903 reported no association between tIgE level and AR diagnosis.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [903]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“sIgE testing became commercially available in 1967 with an assay reliant on radioactive anti-IgE for labeling IgE in serum.910,911”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Karli et al.898 reported that tIgE is helpful in confirming the diagnosis but it cannot be recommended for routine use due to its high cost and the time to perform the test.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [898] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, neither skin or sIgE testing can definitively predict the severity of a patient’s sensitivity to an aeroallergen.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The wheal and flare reaction also may be difficult to detect due to preexisting skin changes.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“All tests approved by the FDA are calibrated against a World Health Organization (WHO) tIgE standard serum.913”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [913] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Chung et al.899 reported that tIgE (cutoff value 150 IU/mL) is a reliable biomarker for AR diagnosis.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [899] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individuals with dermatographism may have exaggerated responses to allergy skin testing, requiring close attention to the results of negative control tests.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, the physical trauma of prick/puncture or intradermal testing may induce a local inflammatory response.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The physical trauma of prick/puncture or intradermal testing may induce a local inflammatory response.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further, skin color may inhibit the ability to visualize the flare reaction, especially in darker skinned individuals.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“This radioactive technique, known as RAST, has largely been replaced with other technologies using enzymatically-driven reactions to produce a chemiluminescent, colorimetric, or fluorimetric reaction quantified or “read” by an autoanalyzer.910,912”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The safety profile of serum sIgE testing is the best of all available allergy tests as the risk for anaphylaxis is nonexistent.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Abnormal skin (eg, dermatitis) may not respond appropriately to histamine, glycerin, or allergen.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specialized imaging systems have been developed to measure the wheal reaction in an automated fashion in both light and dark skinned individuals, but additional validation is required.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In these situations, sIgE levels can help discriminate the most relevant allergen and guide AIT.920”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [920] source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In vitro testing avoids the need to withhold medications that affect skin testing and allows for testing in subjects with dermatographism or other widespread skin disorders.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Based on the reviewed literature, sIgE testing is an acceptable alternative to skin testing and is safe to use in patients who are not candidates for skin testing (Table VIII.F.2).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Further, it has been demonstrated that sIgE shows excellent correlations with both NPT and SPT in the diagnosis of AR.793,822,835,857,911”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SPT measurements are directly observable within 20 minutes, which is typically much faster than laboratory reports are obtained.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both sIgE serology and SPT are considered very safe techniques; however, SPT does carry a very small risk of anaphylaxis.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Studies have shown that sIgE testing has a sensitivity between 67% and 96% and specificity of between 80% and 100%.793,822,835,925,926”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both techniques are sensitive and are generally well correlated; however, interpretation of the results depends upon the gold standard reference used to define allergic status.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to note that while sIgE levels are a biomarker of allergic sensitization, this test alone cannot provide a definitive diagnosis of allergy due to the high rate of clinically irrelevant (false-positive) tests without an indicative clinical history.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the United States, SPT also generally costs about one-half as much as sIgE serology ($6.82 vs $12.50 per allergen tested).935”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [935]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“However, it has been demonstrated that many of these patients may have local allergic phenomena or LAR, a type of rhinitis characterized by the presence of a localized allergic response in the nasal tissues, with local production of sIgE and positive response to NPT without evidence of positive SPT or serum sIgE elevation.107”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [107] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The diagnosis of LAR is confirmed by positive response to NPT, and evidence of sIgE in the nasal secretions.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Value Judgments: In patients with rhinitic symptoms and negative systemic testing, identifying nasal sIgE may assist with appropriate treatment.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“While both typically respond to pharmacologic treatment, identification of offending allergens in LAR may permit allergen avoidance and immunotherapy.107”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [107] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In fact, LAR can present later in life, and in elderly patients with rhinitis the incidence of LAR has been reportedly been as high as 21%.304”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [304] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AIT is the treatment of choice for patients with AR who have failed allergen avoidance and medical therapy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While there is no gold standard, most of these techniques appear to yield similar results in identifying nasal sIgE in LAR patients.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“CD203c (ecto-nucleotide pyrophosphatase/phosphodiesterase 3) is less frequently used.968,972”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Allergens from groups 1, 2, 5 and 6 are only expressed in grasses but not in other plants, so they detect a genuine sensitization to grasses.981”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [981] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Can f 1, Can f 2, and Can f 5 are specific allergen components indicating specific sensitization to dog.993”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [993] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Equ c 3 is a serum albumin showing cross-reactivity with other mammals’ serum albumins mentioned above (i.e. Fel d 2).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [999] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In summary, CRD in patients with allergy to dog, cat, and horse are not only predictive markers of allergy, but may also help clinicians to predict clinical symptoms and their severity, since some patterns of sensitization are related to more severe rhinitis and asthma.994,995”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Der p 10, a tropomyosin from D. pteronyssinus, has been shown to be a good maker of clinical sensitivity to crustaceans but not a marker of sensitization to mites.991,992”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Lep d 2 for Lepidoglyphus destructor (storage mite, with limited cross-reactivity with other HDMs),989”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [989] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pattern of sensitization to allergens may predict the severity of the disease and could potentially predict the efficacy of AIT, provided these immunotherapy products contain a sufficient amount of allergen.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Equ c 1, is the major allergen of horse dander and has some cross-reactivity with mouse Mus m 1 and cat Fel d 4.999”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [999] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“While regulatory authorities accept the use of ACC in phase II of drug development,1067,1068 they have been reluctant to approve them in pivotal phase III studies because the clinical validation is still imperfect.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1067]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [1068]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Therefore, several chamber facilities were installed in recent years with the focus on allergen exposure resulting in currently 15 allergen challenge chamber (ACC) facilities around the globe.1025”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1025] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Major advantages in the ACC setting compared to field studies are better signal-to-noise ratios, a safeguarded minimum level of symptomatology in the ACC, and repeatability of symptoms allowing intraindividual comparisons.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Differences between natural exposure in field studies and ACC studies exist, for example with regard to exposure time (continuous vs intermittent), exposure atmosphere complexity (natural mix vs artificial purity), or selection of study population (all-comers vs allergen-challenge responders).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Environmental exposure chambers (EECs) have been used for decades for controlled exposure of subjects to a well-defined atmosphere of a variety of substances such as allergens, particulate and gaseous air pollutants, chemicals, or climate conditions.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Specifically, following allergen challenge an influx of inflammatory cells was detected by cytology, while the epithelial layer assessed by histology was unchanged from baseline.415”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [415] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“NC is 1 method of diagnosing NAR and has been used to differentiate between variants in experiments.1100”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1100] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to the position paper of the EAACI, occupational rhinitis “can only be established by objective demonstration of the causal relationship between rhinitis and the work environment through NPT with the suspected agent(s) in the laboratory, which is considered the gold standard for diagnosis.”84”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [84] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also, the positive response to CPT is simple to evaluate, because it consists of an immediate reaction (from 5 to 20 minutes from the instillation) with ocular itching, tearing, redness, and possibly conjunctival edema.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The first variant of NAR, known as NARES, was described after the identification of a subset of patients with perennial rhinitis, negative skin tests, and marked eosinophilia in nasal secretions.174”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [174] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the scales to assess the symptoms need to be validated, the standardization of allergen extracts must be improved and the indication to perform CPT in patients with forms of conjunctivitis other than allergic remains uncertain.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This issue, as well as the previously reported drawbacks, makes nasal histology a technique of interest in the research on pathophysiology of AR but hardly feasible for routine clinical practice.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Contraindications to NPT are acute bacterial or viral rhinosinusitis, exacerbation of AR, history of anaphylaxis to allergens, severe general diseases, and pregnancy.1073”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1073] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nasal histology as assessed by biopsies of the nasal cavity was the only technique to study tissues and cells in patients with AR for many decades.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the 1990s, biopsy-based investigations allowed researchers to define the role of the different inflammatory cells in AR.379”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [379] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2005, Howarth et al.1102 stated that, compared to simple techniques such as NC or nasal lavage, nasal biopsy requires expertise both in tissue sampling and in biopsy processing, thus being applicable only in specialist centers.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1102] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In addition, when Lim et al.415 compared nasal histology with cytology in patients with perennial and seasonal rhinitis compared to controls, the results suggested that nasal secretions and the nasal mucosa represent 2 distinct cellular compartments.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Nasal cytology and histology
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [415] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, currently the only technique fulfilling this aim is the EEC (as described in the previous section), while the allergen amounts administered during an NPT usually exceed natural exposure levels, sometimes to a large extent.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Allergen challenge testing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Despite reductions in HDM antigen concentration, Ghazala et al.1120 and Terreehorst et al.1124 both found no clinical benefits of HDM-impermeable bedding as an isolated intervention.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In addition, family adherence to home-based interventions was generally poor, resulting in elevated cockroach concentrations over time.1138”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1138] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Under repeated exposure in the ACC, patients with the membrane filter significantly improved in some of their nasal symptoms.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Allergen avoidance
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1162] source
plaindirectn = 24- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Similar consensus came from ARIA where a “strong recommendation” was given for oral H1 antihistamines for AR.1167”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1167] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Taylor-Clark et al.1194 found similar improvement in nasal airway resistance between cetirizine and ranitidine, but a significant improvement with the use of combination therapy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Taylor-Clark et al.1194
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Patients receiving both H1 and H2 antihistamines reported decreased medication usage (28 corticosteroid days vs 44 corticosteroid days, p < 0.02) and decreased symptoms scores during 1 of the 8 weeks when weed pollen counts were high.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1198] source
plaindirectn = 23 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Due to a very low pollen season, there were no differences in symptom-medication scores between any of the groups.1691”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1691] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The AAO-HNS concluded, based upon RCTs and a preponderance of benefit over harm, a “strong recommendation” for the use of newer-generation oral H1 antihistamines for patients with AR.218”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [218] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Because of these significant side effects, in previously published guidelines and other papers, first-generation antihistamines have not been recommended for the treatment of AR.218,1166,1167”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: First-generation antihistamines are lipophilic, readily cross the blood-brain barrier, and cause sedation, drowsiness, fatigue, impaired concentration and memory, and antimuscarinic effects.
In the paper
“Wood-Baker et al.1193 compared oral cetirizine to oral ranitidine. Objective measures of nasal airway resistance showed greater improvement with ranitidine, yet cetirizine decreased objective measures of nasal secretion more than ranitidine.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wood-Baker et al.1193
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Benefit is generally higher than with single-drug pharmacotherapy; however, it is possibly somewhat less than with SCIT.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Only the Timothy grass monotherapy group showed statistically significant improvement in the nasal challenge test, titrated SPT, sIgE (reduction), and IgG4 (increase).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1691] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The epidermis is rich in APCs while being less vascularized potentially reducing the risk for systemic reaction.1707,1708”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The major advantages of this route of allergen application are the markedly reduced duration of immunotherapy treatment (both time spent and number of visits) and the much lower amount of allergen required to achieve results.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1716] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One year later, only the high-dose treatment group had improved compared to control (p = 0.017); symptoms were reduced by more than 30% (2008 pollen season) and 24% (2009 pollen season) compared with placebo.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1714] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There were no differences in rescue medication use, SPTs, or CPTs.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1714] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Value Judgments: ILIT appears to be efficacious in the treatment of AR. Preliminary data indicates that, relative to SCIT, the burden of treatment on the patient and on the healthcare system is lower.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Records of allergen administration via the skin date back to 1926, where 29 patients with hay fever received intradermal pollen extract administrations; all benefited after only 3 doses without significant side effects.1711”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1711] source
plaindirectn = 29- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Local reactions were more frequent with higher doses and improved with subsequent applications.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1714] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Both groups had an increase in symptoms, but the treatment group had lower rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, dyspnea, and ocular tearing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1713] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Systemic reactions leading to discontinuation of treatment occurred in 11 patients (8.3%) within 45 minutes of patch application; reactions were milder (grade 1 to 2) and did not require treatment with epinephrine.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1714] source
plaindirectn = 11- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cost: ILIT might be associated with reduced costs relative to SCIT (reduced time, reduced financial burden for patients and healthcare provider). Application requires training.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In light of these findings, including poor compliance and limited efficacy, oral/gastrointestinal, nasal, and inhaled immunotherapies have limited utility in the current treatment of AR, while OMIT represents an emerging alternative to SCIT and SLIT.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Asthma and allergy may have similar underlying pathogenesis and immunologic mechanisms. IgE-mediated inflammation can involve both the upper and lower airways, suggesting an integration of the involved areas of the airway.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Asthma
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1750] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While a prior study has estimated the cost of omalizumab (1,253 EUR/patient/month) and AIT therapies (425 EUR/patient/year), evaluation of economic and productivity outcomes has not been completed for patients undergoing combination therapy.1401”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1401] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“AIT desensitizes the body’s response to a specific antigen, with alteration of the Th1/Th2 balance and induction of T-cell anergy.1623”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1623] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While both modalities have independently demonstrated efficacy as treatment options, improved strategies are needed, especially in patients with multiple sensitizations.1733”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Management > Pharmacotherapy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1733] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Asthma and AR also share common risk factors. Sensitization to allergens is probably the most important.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergic rhinitis as a risk factor for asthma
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The 2015 AR clinical practice guideline from the AAO-HNS has highlighted the overlap of AR and asthma, specifically recommending that clinicians should assess for and document associated medical comorbid conditions including asthma.761”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Treatment of allergic rhinitis and its effect on asthma
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [761] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Allergen avoidance is often advocated for allergy treatment, specifically for AR and allergic asthma.7”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [7] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Aggregate Grade of Evidence: C (Level 2a: 2 studies; Level 3b: 11 studies; Table X.A.3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergic rhinitis as a risk factor for asthma
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The 2010 ARIA update further supports the recommendation of LTRAs for both AR and asthma, but specifies that LTRAs are not recommended over other first-line therapies for the respective conditions (ie, it is better to treat asthma and AR with both a nasal and inhaled steroid, than try to treat both with an LTRA).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Patient education and training on medication use improves compliance and benefits for INCS, and likely all patient-administered pharmacotherapy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Value Judgments: Pharmacotherapy for AR may also benefit asthma symptoms and objective parameters of pulmonary function in patients with coexisting asthma and AR, however, the benefit for asthma should be considered a positive side effect rather than an indication for use as there appears to be limited benefit compared to standard asthma therapy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Heterogeneity in study designs may have limited the findings of this meta-analysis and explain the discrepancy of the results compared to high-quality RCTs.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Recent systematic reviews demonstrate that SCIT and SLIT reduce both asthma and rhinitis symptoms, as well as medication use.1694,1822”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Allergen avoidance.
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proteins responsible for PFAS are often labile and may be denatured by heat.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Food allergy and pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, AR has a moderate level of evidence supporting an association with ARS (Level C). Regarding RARS, CRSsNP and CRSwNP, the preponderance of evidence does not support an association, though the evidence is highly conflicting.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Aggregate Grade of Evidence: D (Level 2b: 2 studies; conflicting evidence; Table X.B-2).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“nasal polyps in CRSwNP have high levels of tissue eosinophilia, as well as mast cells and basophils.1”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The available literature is also limited as it often assumes patients who test positive on allergy testing have nasal allergic disease and may not differentiate between systemic allergy and nasal allergy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“PFAS is an IgE-mediated reactivity, which occurs in the oral mucosa, leading to itching, stinging pain, angioedema, and rarely systemic symptoms.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Food allergy and pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Aggregate Grade of Evidence: D (Level 1b: 1 study; Level 3a: 1 study; Level 3b: 8 studies; conflicting evidence; Table X.B-3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite some overlapping pathophysiologic features between allergic disease and CRSwNP, conflicting evidence exists and there is no clear association between AR and CRSwNP.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Aggregate Grade of Evidence: D (Level 2b: 1 study; Level 3a: 1 study; Level 3b: 15 studies; Level 4: 4 studies; conflicting evidence; Table X.B-4).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AR follows a similar inflammatory pathway and this suggests there may be a pathophysiologic similarity between CRSwNP and AR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Rhinosinusitis
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although the burden of illness (impaired QOL) associated with allergic conjunctivitis (AC) is well established”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Conjunctivitis
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1882] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Its burden of illness, impact on QOL, and complications are substantial.1893”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Atopic dermatitis (AD)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1893] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Adenoid enlargement most commonly begins during infancy; it continues through the first 5 to 6 years of life and involutes with puberty.1930,1931”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Symptomatic AH affects an unknown percentage of children and may contribute to a range of symptoms including nasal obstruction, nasal drainage, sleep disturbance, increased episodes of rhinosinusitis, increased lower respiratory tract infections, worsened asthma, and Eustachian tube dysfunction.1930,1932”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The antihistamine used in this study, astemizole, has been removed from the market due to QT interval prolongation on electrocardiogram.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Food allergy and pollen-food allergy syndrome (PFAS)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was small (n = 67 among 4 groups) and did not state whether it was blinded (Table X.F).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
plainn = 67- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both studies were small.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“AR is an independent risk factor for the development of OME.1965”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1965] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“but whether this is due to decrease in adenoid size is less clear and blinded studies are uncommon. 1946”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Adenoid hypertrophy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1946] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“some studies suggest a nearly universal association of OME and allergic disease.1966-1970”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“natural pollen exposure has been associated with negative middle ear pressures1954 and defects in Eustachian tube opening.1955”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“others have shown a dramatically increased prevalence of IgE sensitization or clinical allergy in OME patients,1961-1964”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The key pathogenic mechanism is the inflammation of the upper airways with extension to the lower airways and the induction of a systemic dysregulation via a complex interaction between cells and inflammatory cytokines.1986”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1986]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“AR and asthma may coexist and may indeed produce a continuum of the same airway disease.1167”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1167] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The basic pathophysiologic defect in Meniere’s disease appears to be a dysregulation of endolymph in the inner ear (endolymphatic hydrops).1975”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1975] source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The Asia Pacific Burden of Respiratory Diseases study, a 1000-person cross-sectional observational study, revealed that cough was the primary reason for a visit to the physician for patients with asthma and or COPD.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, a direct mechanism due to diffuse inflammation and activation of eosinophils may be responsible for the common upper and lower airway manifestations.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Aggregate Grade of Evidence: C (Level 3b: 4 studies; Level 4: 4 studies; Table X.G-3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
plaincorrelational- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“allergy treatment including AIT results in improved Meniere’s disease symptoms.1979,1980”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While patients with AR that have concomitant chest symptoms such as cough often do have asthma, seasonal asthma, and/or a nonspecific bronchial hyperreactivity, many studies show generalized inflammation of the upper airways extending to the lower airways.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on cough suggest the term upper airway cough syndrome, rather than postnasal drip syndrome, when discussing a cough originating from the upper airway due to the varying possible causes.1985”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1985] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Derebery and colleagues have published studies suggesting that inhalant and food allergies are more common in Meniere’s patients,1978”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1978] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, these studies generally provide low grade evidence”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, the evidence supporting a connection between type 1 IgE-mediated hypersensitivity and Meniere’s disease is of low grade, with substantial defects in study design (Table X.G-3).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There is evidence that vagal afferent nerves regulate an involuntary cough; yet, there is also cortical control of this overall visceral reflex.1985”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1985] source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AR is often a comorbidity with asthma which also has an increased correlation with cough.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The numbers were 61% and 33%, respectively, for patients with asthma and cough.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1993] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is suggestive of an active structural remodeling of the lower airways in AR patients that is similar to asthma patients but less severe.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A study by Eren et al.2005 supported this diagnostic challenge in demonstrating no significant difference in the appearance of the larynx between allergy-positive and LPR-positive subjects; however, thick endolaryngeal mucus has been shown to be a predictor of allergy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2005] source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Krzych-Falta et al.1989 performed a nasal challenge in 30 patients with AR. Extranasal symptoms were noted, including a cough and breathlessness, especially in those with PAR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1989]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelationaln = 30- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AR has been implicated as a cause of laryngeal disease. However, further understanding of its precise role has been limited.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While previous research has provided anecdotal evidence of a relationship between the 2, establishing a causal relationship between AR and laryngeal dysfunction had proven difficult due to a lack of safe and effective models for studying the larynx.1995”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1995] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, allergy testing may be positive in up to 46% of the general population.2004”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2004] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Findings of laryngeal inflammation have largely been attributed to laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but various etiologies may contribute to laryngeal dysfunction.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 2000, Chakir et al.1990 performed histochemical tests on bronchial biopsies of patients with AR but without current or history of asthma. They demonstrated increased numbers of lymphocytes, eosinophil recruitment and IL-5 expression in the bronchial mucosa after exposure with natural pollen.1990”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1990] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Belafsky et al.2006 and Mouadeb et al.2007 examined the effects of Dermatophagoides on the laryngeal mucosa of guinea pigs and found an increase in eosinophilia compared to those exposed to saline, which provides some support for etiologies other than reflux contributing to laryngeal disease.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“With over 5250 patients enrolled, the study found that 47% of patients with AR frequently reported cough as a symptom; however, only 11% of these patients had cough as the main reason for seeking medical care.1993”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1993] source
plainn = 5,250- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Studies have reported the adverse effects of AR on voice-related QOL, and Turley et al.2001 validated this by showing that patients who reported poor rhinitis-related QOL on questionnaires also had poor voice-related QOL and more severe chronic laryngeal symptoms.1996,1998”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a study of patients presenting with voice complaints, Randhawa et al.2003 noted that two-thirds of patients were diagnosed with allergies whereas only one-third were diagnosed with LPR.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2003] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Overall, patients with vocal dysfunction have a higher than anticipated incidence of AR and vice versa1999,2001,2002”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Buday et al.1992 demonstrated that guinea pigs sensitized to HDM had a significantly enhanced cough response compared to those that were not sensitized; however, airway resistances did not change.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Otologic conditions Eustachian tube dysfunction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1992] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Laryngeal findings in AR and LPR can be indistinguishable and include laryngeal edema, excessive mucus, vocal fold erythema, and arytenoid erythema.1995,2005”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a subsequent study, Dworkin et al.2010 increased the concentration of allergen in the antigenic suspension and noted an increase in endolaryngeal mucus in addition to coughing and throat clearing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2010] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The study was terminated prematurely due to adverse pulmonary reactions attributed to the higher antigen concentration, and it is possible that the lower airway reactivity contributed to the visualized endolaryngeal mucus.2010”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2010] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There have not been consistently reported laryngeal findings specific to allergic laryngitis, though thick endolaryngeal mucous should raise suspicion for allergy as a cause.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The severity of AR symptoms was also shown to affect the duration of sleep, frequency of daytime somnolence, and sleep latency.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Sleep disturbance and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite anecdotal evidence implicating the role of allergic laryngitis in laryngeal dysfunction, there have been limited studies demonstrating a direct causal relationship between the 2.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Initially, Reidy et al.2009 were unable to find any significant difference between antigen-challenged and placebo-challenged subjects on any of the evaluated measures, including VHI, Sinus Symptoms Questionnaire, laryngoscopic findings, and acoustic and speech aerodynamic testing.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2009] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Roth et al.2008 then performed a study using similar methods but isolated the larynx by utilizing a nose clip to ensure oral inhalation and by eliminating patients with reactive airways based on methacholine challenge testing. They demonstrate an apparent causal relationship between allergen stimulation and impaired vocal function.2008”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Laryngeal disease
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2008] source
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“There were modest differences in sleep efficiency, arousal index, and snoring time.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Sleep disturbance and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [720] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While certain areas (ie, early childhood exposure to pets as a risk factor vs protective factor) have seen numerous articles published, the data is highly conflicting.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Knowledge gaps and research opportunities > Epidemiology and risk factors
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evaluation of the patient with suspected AR classically relies on a thorough history, often reinforced by findings on physical examination. The diagnosis is further supported with skin or in vitro testing methods.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Knowledge gaps and research opportunities > Evaluation and diagnosis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SCIT and SLIT also have very high LOEs in general, yet specific issues related to AIT management could be bolstered with additional evidence.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Knowledge gaps and research opportunities > Management
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Genetic studies provide some notable evidence for potential AR risk but functional data needs to be expanded.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Knowledge gaps and research opportunities > Epidemiology and risk factors
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The second-generation H1 antagonists have less propensity for crossing the blood-brain barrier and are therefore less sedating.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Associated conditions > Sleep disturbance and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other areas, such as early exposure to pollens and mites, the data is more limited.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Knowledge gaps and research opportunities > Epidemiology and risk factors
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The existing literature related to AR is quite deep in certain areas but notably lacking in others (Table XI).”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Knowledge gaps and research opportunities
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These techniques have been rather dependable, provided objective testing is correlated to the patient’s clinical symptoms and not used in isolation to determine a treatment plan, as there are distinct differences between sensitization and clinical allergy.”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Knowledge gaps and research opportunities > Evaluation and diagnosis
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Examining the quality and validity of AR literature is required to improve understanding and apply knowledge in clinical care.
“Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Updating recommendations as evidence changes will improve patient outcomes.
“With new evidence, recommendations will undergo necessary revisions and better patient outcomes should result.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Larger chemical particles are typically responsible for chemical rhinitis, while smaller particles usually pass to the lower airways.
“Larger chemical particles are typically the culprit in this form of rhinitis as smaller particles usually pass through to the lower airways.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Smoke-induced rhinitis does not appear to be driven by IgE-mediated hypersensitivity.
“but smoke-induced rhinitis does not appear to be driven by IgE-mediated hypersensitivity”
The paper relies on this without support.
Altered mucociliary clearance results from tobacco smoke exposure.
“In addition, altered mucociliary clearance (MCC) resulting from tobacco smoke exposure has been demonstrated.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Dark or purulent rhinorrhea alone is not pathognomonic for bacterial rhinitis or rhinosinusitis.
“Taken in isolation, dark or purulent rhinorrhea is not pathognomonic for bacterial rhinitis/rhinosinusitis.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Rhinitis of pregnancy does not usually require therapy and does not respond well to standard allergy medications.
“Rhinitis of pregnancy does not usually require therapy, nor does it respond well to standard allergy medications.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Certain food ingestions may cause rhinitis through a nonimmunologic reaction and are therefore not allergy.
“Certain food ingestions may result in rhinitis based on a nonimmunologic reaction, and therefore are not characterized as an allergy.”
The paper relies on this without support.
NARES pathophysiology involves eosinophilic, self-perpetuating inflammation with nonspecific histamine release.
“The pathophysiology of NARES is not well understood, but a key component involves an eosinophilic, self-perpetuating inflammation, with nonspecific histamine release.”
The paper relies on this without support.
ENS has repeatedly been described erroneously in the literature as a form or subset of atrophic rhinitis.
“In the literature, ENS has repeatedly been described erroneously as a form or subset of atrophic rhinitis.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The nose acts as a filter and air conditioner that protects the lower airways.
“The nose acts as a filter and air conditioner, protecting the lower airways.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Mouth breathing is independently associated with asthma morbidity.
“Mouth breathing is independently associated with asthma morbidity, indicating that air conditioning can be of major importance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The efficacy of the nasal filter depends on the size of inhaled particles.
“The efficacy of the nasal filter depends on the size of the inhaled particles.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Small molecules such as molds and cat dander are more associated with increased risk for asthma, whereas larger molecules such as tree and grass pollen are primarily associated with upper airway symptoms.
“Small molecules, such as molds and cat dander, are more associated with an increased risk for asthma, whereas larger molecules, such as tree and grass pollen, are primarily associated with upper airway symptoms.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Nasal allergen challenge can be blocked with a vasoconstrictor but not with lidocaine.
“Nasal allergen challenge can be blocked with a vasoconstrictor but not with lidocaine.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The heritability of allergic rhinitis is as high as 70% to 80%.
“The estimated heritability of AR has been suggested to be as high as 70% to 80%.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No single gene or polymorphism accounts for the hereditary effect on allergic rhinitis; instead, many genes and several variants, each with small effects, contribute to disease initiation, persistence, and severity.
“Like many complex diseases, no single gene or polymorphism accounts for the hereditary effect on AR. Instead, many genes and several variants, each with small effects, are believed to contribute to disease initiation, persistence, and severity.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Toll-like receptors play a crucial role in immune regulation.
“TLRs play a crucial role in immune regulation and SNPs in different TLRs have been associated with AR in both GWASs (TLR1, TLR6, TLR10)486,487 and candidate gene studies (TLR8), as discussed in the”
The paper relies on this without support.
Sensitization to a specific allergen requires a primitive exposure to that allergen.
“Sensitization is a complex phenomenon, regulated by genetic and environmental factors, requiring a primitive exposure to a specific allergen. If a subject is never exposed to an allergen, sensitization to that allergen cannot occur.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Without sensitization, allergy cannot exist, but sensitization can exist without allergy.
“Without sensitization allergy cannot exist, but not vice versa.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Among subjects sensitized to pet allergens, exposure tends to exacerbate symptoms.
“Among subjects sensitized to pet allergens, exposure tends to exacerbate symptoms.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Allergic rhinitis is the most common chronic disorder in the pediatric population.
“AR is the most common chronic disorder in the pediatric population.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Every medical diagnosis requires a clinical history and physical examination.
“However, the lack of higher level evidence is not surprising as a clinical history and physical examination is essential to any medical diagnosis and randomized studies would require participants to receive an intervention without a clinical history.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Randomized diagnostic studies would need participants to receive an intervention without any clinical history.
“However, the lack of higher level evidence is not surprising as a clinical history and physical examination is essential to any medical diagnosis and randomized studies would require participants to receive an intervention without a clinical history.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Where resources are scarce, SPT and lab testing may be unavailable.
“Furthermore, in regions where resources are scarce, SPT and laboratory testing may not be as readily available.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Some drugs and skin disorders can interfere with skin testing.
“Certain medications and skin conditions may interfere with skin testing.”
The paper relies on this without support.
SPT has absolute or relative contraindications: uncontrolled/severe asthma, severe/unstable cardiovascular disease, beta-blockers, and pregnancy.
“Absolute or relative contraindications to SPT include uncontrolled or severe asthma, severe or unstable cardiovascular disease, concurrent beta-blocker therapy, and pregnancy.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Clinical practices differ widely in how many and which antigens they use for SPT.
“The number and choice of antigens used in testing varies considerably between clinical practices.”
The paper relies on this without support.
For some instruments a high score means worse disease; for others it means better symptom control.
“It is important to note that some tools use a higher score to indicate severe disease whereas other tools use a higher score to indicate better control of symptoms.”
The paper relies on this without support.
On RCAT, ARCT, and CARAT10, higher values reflect better allergic symptom control.
“For example, a high score on the RCAT, ARCT, and CARAT10 indicate good control of allergic symptoms.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The wheal and flare reaction in allergy skin testing depends on histamine released from mast cells upon degranulation.
“The wheal and flare reaction seen in allergy skin testing depends upon the physiologic actions of histamine released from mast cells upon degranulation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The usefulness of allergy skin testing depends on the ability to detect a Type I hypersensitivity reaction after allergen introduction into the skin.
“The usefulness of allergy skin testing depends upon the ability to detect a Type I hypersensitivity reaction after allergen introduction into the skin.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The physical trauma of prick/puncture or intradermal testing may induce a local inflammatory response.
“Additionally, the physical trauma of prick/puncture or intradermal testing may induce a local inflammatory response.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The amount of allergen administered during nasal provocation testing typically exceeds natural exposure levels.
“while the allergen amounts administered during an NPT usually exceed natural exposure levels, sometimes to a large extent.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Locally produced IgE cannot currently be measured in routine clinical settings.
“Despite the introduction of techniques to detect IgE in the nose in the 1970s,1078 the ability to measure locally-present IgE in the clinic setting is not currently available.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Clinical validation of allergen challenge chambers remains imperfect.
“they have been reluctant to approve them in pivotal phase III studies because the clinical validation is still imperfect.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Histamine is a major mediator associated with the symptomatology of allergic rhinitis.
“Histamine is a major mediator associated with the symptomatology of AR.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Oral H1 antihistamines block the action of histamine by binding the histamine H1 receptor and thereby inhibiting the proinflammatory effects of histamine.
“Oral H1 antihistamines block the action of histamine by binding the histamine H1 receptor, thereby inhibiting the proinflammatory effects of histamine.”
The paper relies on this without support.
First-generation antihistamines are lipophilic, readily cross the blood-brain barrier, and cause sedation, drowsiness, fatigue, impaired concentration and memory, and antimuscarinic effects.
“The older first-generation agents (ie, diphenhydramine, chlorpheniramine, brompheniramine) were lipophilic and readily crossed the blood-brain barrier. This caused unwanted side effects such as sedation, drowsiness, fatigue, and impaired concentration, and memory as well as anti-muscarinic effects.”
The paper relies on this without support.
First-generation antihistamines inhibit CYP2D6 hepatic enzymes.
“First-generation antihistamines are also inhibitors of the CYP2D6 hepatic enzymes.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Newer-generation antihistamines are highly selective for the H1 receptor, lipophobic, and have limited penetration across the blood-brain barrier.
“They are highly selective for the H1 receptor, lipophobic, and have limited penetration across the blood-brain barrier.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Newer-generation antihistamines, except cetirizine, levocetirizine, bilastine, and fexofenadine, are metabolized by the hepatic cytochrome P450 CYP3A4 system.
“Newer-generation antihistamines, except for cetirizine, levocetirizine, bilastine, and fexofenadine, are metabolized by the hepatic cytochrome P450 CYP3A4 system.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Direct costs of newer-generation antihistamines are similar because many are available as over-the-counter medications.
“Direct costs of newer-generation antihistamines are similar given the availability of many of these drugs as over-the-counter medications.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The cost of prescription-only formulations of levocetirizine and desloratadine is much higher.
“In contrast, the cost of prescription-only formulations (levocetirizine and desloratadine) is much higher.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Omalizumab is not currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of AR.
“omalizumab is not currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of AR”
“as omalizumab is not currently approved by the FDA for AR treatment”
The paper relies on this without support.
Elevated histamine levels after allergen challenge are associated with bronchoconstriction responses in acute asthma episodes.
“elevated histamine levels after allergen challenge are associated with bronchoconstriction responses in acute asthma episodes.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Allergen immunotherapy has long-lasting effects even after treatment is discontinued, unlike pharmacotherapy.
“AIT also appears to have long-lasting effects even after discontinuing treatment, unlike pharmacotherapy.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Omalizumab has a substantially higher cost than conventional therapy for asthma and allergic rhinitis.
“Cost: Substantially higher cost than conventional therapy for asthma and AR.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Allergen immunotherapy has increased cost compared with standard therapy for allergic rhinitis and asthma.
“Cost: Increased cost compared to standard therapy for AR and asthma”
The paper relies on this without support.
The neurophysiology of the vagus nerve in guinea pigs is closest to that in humans.
“since the neurophysiology of the vagus nerve in the guinea pig is thought to be closest to humans.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
“sIgE testing became commercially available in 1967 with an assay reliant on radioactive anti-IgE for labeling IgE in serum.910,911”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > In vitro testing
“The discovery of IgE in 1969 allowed for the development of in vitro serological tests which have become increasingly utilized.929”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
“9 of these reports range from level 1a to 2b (overall Grade A evidence)”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Evaluation and diagnosis > Use of validated survey instruments
“- Aggregate Grade of Evidence: A (Level 1a: 2 studies; Level 1b: 4 studies; Level 2b: 4 studies; Table VIII.D-2). Note: multiple additional studies were reviewed, but Grade A evidence was reached with these 10 studies”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Definition and differential diagnosis > Allergic rhinitis classification
“Persistent AR (PER) is characterized by symptoms occurring more than 4 days per week for at least 4 consecutive weeks”
§ International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis > Epidemiology of allergic rhinitis > Prevalence of allergic rhinitis in adults
“persistent (lasting more than 4 days/week for more than 4 consecutive weeks)”
Citations
Cites
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 · Cited by 28,164
WARE, J. E., KOSINSKI, M., & KELLER, S. D. (1996) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003 · Cited by 17,392
Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M. C., Gray, J. A. M., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 · Cited by 15,769
GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR ASTHMA MANAGEMENT AND PREVENTION
PAUWELS, R. A. (1996) · Arerugī/Arerugi · doi:10.15036/arerugi.45.792 · Cited by 9,997
Pushko, P., Pumpens, P., & Grens, E. (2013) · Intervirology · doi:10.1159/000346773 · Cited by 5,975
European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020
Fokkens, W. J., Lund, V. J., Hopkins, C., Hellings, P. W., Kern, R., Reitsma, S., Toppila-Salmi, S., Bernal-Sprekelsen, M., Mullol, J., Alobid, I., et al. (2020) · Rhinology journal · doi:10.4193/rhin20.600 · Cited by 5,882
Self-citationBreastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk
Breastfeeding, S. O. (2005) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2004-2491 · Cited by 5,357
Hay fever, hygiene, and household size.
Strachan, D. P. (1989) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.299.6710.1259 · Cited by 5,054
Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) 2008*
Bousquet, J., Khaltaev, N., Cruz, A. A., Denburg, J., Fokkens, W. J., Togias, A., Zuberbier, T., Baena‐Cagnani, C. E., Canonica, G. W., Van Weel, C., et al. (2008) · Allergy · doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01620.x · Cited by 4,729
Self-citationMcHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E., Rachel Lu, J. F., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1994) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199401000-00004 · Cited by 4,458
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Oxford Centre for Evidence‐based Medicine (CEBM).Levels of Evidence.http://www.cebm.net/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/. Accessed December 19 2017.
- Bralow L, 2004, Vicks Sinex PDR
- Asis LB, 2015, Manual of Allergy and Clinical Immunology for Otolaryngologists, 383
- Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP).Guideline on the clinical development of products for specific immunotherapy for the treatment of allergic diseases. Pre‐authorisation evaluation of medicines for human use. November 20 2008. Doc. Ref. CHMP/EWP/18504/2006. European Medicines Agency;2008:S1–S13.http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003605.pdf. Accessed December 19 2017.
- Kujundzic M, 2013, Mometasone furoate and nasal vascularisation in allergic patients, Coll Antropol, 37, 127
- Jan RH, 2011, Is the effect of probiotics on allergic rhnitis confined to Dermatophagoides farinae, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, or dust‐sensitive children? A randomized prospective double‐blind controlled trial, Ci Ji Yi Xue Za Zhi, 23, 51
- Circassia Pharmaceuticals.Circassia Announces Top‐Line Results from Cat Allergy Phase III Study. Press release. Oxford UK: Circassia Pharmaceuticals; June 20 2016.http://www.circassia.com/media/press-releases/circassia-announces-top-line-results-from-cat-allergy-phase-iii-study/. Accessed December 19 2017.
- Circassia Pharmaceuticals.Circassia Announces Top‐Line Results from House Dust Mite Allergy Field Study. Press release. Oxford UK: Circassia Pharmaceuticals; April 18 2017.http://www.circassia.com/media/press-releases/circassia-announces-top-line-results-from-house-dust-mite-allergy-field-study/. Accessed December 19 2017.
- British guideline on the management of asthma, 2016, Edinburgh: UK: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network
- 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.09.029 · DOI · Paper page
- Krouse JH, 2002, Allergy and Immunology: An Otolaryngic Approach
- Tomonaga K, 1998, The role of nasal allergy in otitis media with effusiom, Acta Otolaryngol, 458, s41
- 10.1016/S0194-59989670204-8 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: rhinosinusitis 2021
Orlandi, R. R., Kingdom, T. T., Smith, T. L., Bleier, B. S., DeConde, A. S., Luong, A., Poetker, D. M., Soler, Z. M., Welch, K. C., Wise, S. K., et al. (2020) · International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · doi:10.1002/alr.22741 · Cited by 1,084
Self-citationInternational consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Allergic rhinitis – 2023
Wise, S. K., Damask, C. C., Roland, L. T., Ebert, C. S., Levy, J. M., Lin, S. Y., Luong, A., Rodriguez, K., Sedaghat, A. R., Toskala, E. M., et al. (2023) · International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · doi:10.1002/alr.23090 · Cited by 584
Self-citationRhinitis 2020: A practice parameter update
Dykewicz, M. S., Wallace, D. V., Amrol, D. J., Baroody, F. M., Bernstein, J. A., Craig, T., Dinakar, C., Ellis, A. K., Finegold, I., Golden, D. B. K., et al. (2020) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2020.07.007 · Cited by 483
Self-citationInternational consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: allergic rhinitis—executive summary
Wise, S. K., Lin, S. Y., & Toskala, E. M. (2018) · International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · doi:10.1002/alr.22070 · Cited by 222
Self-citationICAR: endoscopic skull‐base surgery
Wang, E. W., Zanation, A. M., Gardner, P. A., Schwartz, T. H., Eloy, J. A., Adappa, N. D., Bettag, M., Bleier, B. S., Cappabianca, P., Carrau, R. L., et al. (2019) · International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · doi:10.1002/alr.22326 · Cited by 241
“Emanuelli651 2012 4 Case series 5 Patients with petrous apex (4) or clival (1) CG 1.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Wise, S. K., Lin, S. Y., Toskala, E., Orlandi, R. R., Akdis, C. A., Alt, J. A., Azar, A., Baroody, F. M., Bachert, C., Canonica, G. W., Chacko, T., Cingi, C., Ciprandi, G., Corey, J., Cox, L. S., Creticos, P. S., Custovic, A., Damask, C., DeConde, A., DelGaudio, J. M., Ebert, C. S., Eloy, J. A., Flanagan, C. E., Fokkens, W. J., Franzese, C., Gosepath, J., Halderman, A., Hamilton, R. G., Hoffman, H. J., Hohlfeld, J. M., Houser, S. M., Hwang, P. H., Incorvaia, C., Jarvis, D., Khalid, A. N., Kilpeläinen, M., Kingdom, T. T., Krouse, H., Larenas‐Linnemann, D., Laury, A. M., Lee, S. E., Levy, J. M., Luong, A. U., Marple, B. F., McCoul, E. D., McMains, K. C., Melén, E., Mims, J. W., Moscato, G., Mullol, J., Nelson, H. S., Patadia, M., Pawankar, R., Pfaar, O., Platt, M. P., Reisacher, W., Rondón, C., Rudmik, L., Ryan, M., Sastre, J., Schlosser, R. J., Settipane, R. A., Sharma, H. P., Sheikh, A., Smith, T. L., Tantilipikorn, P., Tversky, J. R., Veling, M. C., Wang, D. Y., Westman, M., Wickman, M., & Zacharek, M.
- Affiliations
- Emory University (US)
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Temple University (US)
- University of Utah (US)
- Allergy/Asthma Swiss Institute of Allergy and Asthma Research Switzerland
- University of Chicago (US)
- Ghent University (BE)
- Humanitas University (IT)
- Allergy/Immunology Private Practice USA
- Eskişehir Osmangazi University (TR)
- Ospedale Policlinico San Martino (IT)
- Pediatric Allergy Imperial College London UK
- Otolaryngology Private Practice USA
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Otolaryngology University of North Carolina USA
- Rutgers New Jersey Medical School (US)
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- University of Missouri (US)
- Helios Dr. Horst Schmidt Kliniken Wiesbaden (DE)
- The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
- Aarhus University (DK)
- Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
- Case Western Reserve University (US)
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- Allergy/Immunology ASST Pini/CTO Milan Italy
- Imperial College London (GB)
- Harvard University (US)
- Turku University Hospital (FI)
- University of Colorado Denver (US)
- The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (US)
- Pediatric Allergy Hospital Medica Sur Mexico
- Brooke Army Medical Center (US)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
- Ochsner Medical Center (US)
- Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (US)
- Karolinska Institutet (SE)
- Wake Forest University (US)
- University of Pavia (IT)
- Hospital Clínic de Barcelona (ES)
- National Jewish Health (US)
- Loyola University Chicago (US)
- Nippon Medical School (JP)
- Heidelberg University (DE)
- Boston University (US)
- Cornell University (US)
- Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga (ES)
- University of Calgary (CA)
- Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz (ES)
- Medical University of South Carolina (US)
- Brown University (US)
- Children's National (US)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- Mahidol University (TH)
- National University of Singapore (SG)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wise, Sarah K.
- ORCID
- Wise, Sarah K.
- Lin, Sandra Y.
- Toskala, Elina
- Orlandi, Richard R.
- Alt, Jeremiah A.
- Azar, Antoine
- Baroody, Fuad M.
- Bachert, Claus
- Canonica, G. Walter
- Cingi, Cemal
- Ciprandi, Giorgio
- Cox, Linda S.
- Creticos, Peter Socrates
- DelGaudio, John M.
- Ebert, Charles S.
- Eloy, Jean Anderson
- Flanagan, Carrie E.
- Fokkens, Wytske J.
- Franzese, Christine
- Gosepath, Jan
- Halderman, Ashleigh
- Hamilton, Robert G.
- Hohlfeld, Jens M.
- Hwang, Peter H.
- Incorvaia, Cristoforo
- Jarvis, Deborah
- Khalid, Ayesha N.
- Kingdom, Todd. T.
- Krouse, Helene
- Lee, Stella E.
- Levy, Joshua M.
- Luong, Amber U.
- McCoul, Edward D.
- McMains, K. Christopher
- Melén, Erik
- Moscato, Gianna
- Mullol, Joaquim
- Nelson, Harold S.
- Pfaar, Oliver
- Platt, Michael P.
- Rondón, Carmen
- Rudmik, Luke
- Sastre, Joaquin
- Schlosser, Rodney J.
- Settipane, Russell A.
- Sharma, Hemant P.
- Sheikh, Aziz
- Smith, Timothy L.
- Tantilipikorn, Pongsakorn
- Tversky, Jody R.
- Wang, De Yun
- Westman, Marit
- Wickman, Magnus
- Venue
- International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-02
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 108-352
- ISSN
- 2042-6976 (ISSN-L)
- 2042-6984
- PMC
- PMC7286723
- OpenAlex
- W2793898214
- Semantic Scholar
- d0b355b79ea4db54ec1de68bd2761f99776781aa
- Cited by
- 557
- References
- 2,094
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 101 · 2021: 88 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 22
- FWCI
- 51.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- ScholarWorks @ UTRGV (The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- UTUPub (University of Turku) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RISalud Institutional Health Repository of Andalucía (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Publikationsdatenbank der Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft) (submittedVersion)
- Fraunhofer-Publica (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft) (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
- UTUPub (University of Turku) (submittedVersion)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- American Academy of Otolaryngic Allergy Foundation
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Allergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Asthma and respiratory diseases
- Keywords
- allergic rhinitis, diagnosis, pathophysiology, disease burden, risk factors, allergy testing, treatment, comorbidities, research gaps
- MeSH terms
- Saline Solution, Adrenal Cortex Hormones, Allergens, Complementary Therapies, Biological Products, Diagnosis, Differential, Drug Therapy, Combination, Endoscopy, Environmental Exposure, Epidemiologic Methods, Histamine Antagonists, Humans, Immunoglobulin E, Occupational Diseases, Physical Examination, Quality of Life, Risk Factors, Skin Tests, Socioeconomic Factors, Nasal Decongestants, Cytokines, Probiotics, Respiratory Mucosa, Microbiota, Rhinitis, Allergic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review