Simple jQuery Dropdowns
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis
Authors: Sarah K. Wise
Sandra Y. Lin
Elina Toskala
Richard R. Orlandi
Cezmi A. Akdis
Jeremiah A. Alt
Antoine Azar
Fuad M. Baroody
Claus Bachert
G. Walter Canonica
Thomas Chacko
Cemal Cingi
Giorgio Ciprandi
Jacquelynne Corey
Linda S. Cox
Peter Socrates Creticos
Adnan Custovic
Cecelia Damask
Adam DeConde
John M. DelGaudio
Charles S. Ebert
Jean Anderson Eloy
Carrie E. Flanagan
Wytske J. Fokkens
Christine Franzese
Jan Gosepath
Ashleigh Halderman
Robert G. Hamilton
Hans Jürgen Hoffman
Jens M. Hohlfeld
Steven M. Houser
Peter H. Hwang
Cristoforo Incorvaia
Deborah Jarvis
Ayesha N. Khalid
Maritta Kilpeläinen
Todd T. Kingdom
Helene Krouse
Desiree Larenas-Linnemann
Adrienne M. Laury
Stella E. Lee
Joshua M. Levy
Amber U. Luong
Bradley F. Marple
Edward D. McCoul
K. Christopher McMains
Erik Melén
James W. Mims
Gianna Moscato
Joaquim Mullol
Harold S. Nelson
Monica Patadia
Ruby Pawankar
Oliver Pfaar
Michael P. Platt
William Reisacher
Carmen Rondón
Luke Rudmik
Matthew Ryan
Joaquin Sastre
Rodney J. Schlosser
Russell A. Settipane
Hemant P. Sharma
Aziz Sheikh
Timothy L. Smith
Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn
Jody R. Tversky
Maria C. Veling
De Yun Wang
Marit Westman
Magnus Wickman
Mark Zacharek
University of Texas Rio Grande Valley
Ospedale Policlinico San Martino
Humanitas University
National Jewish Health
Universiteit Gent
Wake Forest University
University of California, San Diego
Temple University
Aarhus Universitet
The University of Chicago
Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi
University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
University of Edinburgh
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Turun Yliopistollinen Keskussairaala
University of Utah
George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences
University of Missouri System
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH)
Medical University of South Carolina
Boston University
Nippon Medical School
Ochsner Health System
The University of North Carolina System
National University of Singapore
Universität Heidelberg
Oregon Health and Science University
University of Pittsburgh
Università degli Studi di Pavia
Imperial College London
Hospital Regional Universitario Carlos Haya
Mahidol University
Stanford University
Karolinska Institutet
Swiss Institute of Allergy and Asthma Research
Brown University
Weill Cornell Medical College
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Johns Hopkins University
Rutgers New Jersey Medical School
Harvard Medical School
University of Amsterdam
University of Calgary
Universitat de Barcelona
Emory University
Case Western Reserve University
University of Colorado at Boulder
Hospital Universitario Fundacion Jiminez Diaz
Loyola University
Hospital Médica Sur
University of Texas Southwestern
San Antonio Military Medical Center
Keywords: Medicine
Issue Date: 1-Feb-2018
Citation: International Forum of Allergy and Rhinology. Vol.8, No.2 (2018), 108-352
Abstract: © 2018 ARS-AAOA, LLC 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.
ISSN: 20426984
Appears in Collections:Scopus 2018

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.