Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies could potentially change many aspects of clinical practice. While Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) can change the course of allergic diseases providing relief of symptoms that extend for many years after treatment completion, it can also bring uncertainty to patients, who turn to readily available resources such as ChatGPT-4 to address these doubts. The aim of this study was to use validated tools to evaluate the information provided by ChatGPT-4 regarding AIT in terms of quality, reliability and readability. Methods: In accordance with AIT clinical guidelines, 24 questions were selected and introduced in ChatGPT-4. Answers were evaluated by a panel of allergists, using validated tools DISCERN, JAMA Benchmark and Flesch Reading Ease Score and Grade Level. Results: Questions were sorted into 6 categories. ChatGPT provided bad quality information according to DISCERN medians scores in the “Definition”, “Standardization and Efficacy”, and “Safety and Adverse Reactions” categories. It provided insufficient information according to JAMA Benchmark across all categories. Finally, ChatGPT-4 answers required a “college graduate” level of education to be understood as they were very difficult to read. Conclusions: ChatGPT-4 exhibits potential as a valuable complement to healthcare; however, it requires further refinement. The information it provides should be approached with caution regarding its quality, as significant details may be omitted or may not be fully comprehensible. Artificial intelligence models continue to evolve, and medical professionals should participate in this process, given that AI impacts various aspects of life, including health, to ensure the availability of optimal information.

Monitoring is a major component of asthma management in children. Regular monitoring allows for diagnosis confirmation, treatment optimization and natural history review. Numerous factors that may affect disease activity and patient wellbeing need to be monitored: response and adherence to treatment, disease control, disease progression, comorbidities, quality of life, medication side-effects, allergen and irritant exposures, diet and more. However, the prioritization of such factors and the selection of relevant assessment tools is an unmet need. Furthermore, rapidly developing technologies promise new opportunities for closer, or even ‘real-time’, monitoring between visits. Following an approach that included needs assessment, evidence appraisal and Delphi consensus, the PeARL Think Tank, in collaboration with major international professional and patient organizations, has developed a set of 24 recommendations on pediatric asthma monitoring, to support healthcare professionals in decision-making and care pathway design.

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) provides a common language for use worldwide as a diagnostic and classification tool for epidemiology, clinical purposes and health management. Since its first edition, the ICD has maintained a framework distributing conditions according to topography, with the result that some complex conditions, such as allergies and hypersensitivity disorders (A/H) including anaphylaxis, have been poorly represented. The change in hierarchy in ICD-11 permitted the construction of the pioneer section addressed to A/H, which may result in more accurate mortality and morbidity statistics, including more accurate accounting for mortality due to anaphylaxis, strengthen classification, terminology and definitions. The ICD-11 was presented and adopted by the 72nd World Health Assembly in May 2019 and the implementation is ongoing worldwide. We here present the outcomes from an online survey undertaken to reach out the allergy community worldwide in order to peer review the terminology, classification and definitions of A/H introduced into ICD-11 and to support their global implementation. Data are presented here for 406 respondents from 74 countries. All of the sub-sections of the new A/H section of the ICD-11 had been considered with good accuracy by the majority of respondents. We believe that, in addition to help during the implementation phase, all the comments provided will help to improve the A/H classification and to increase awareness by different disciplines of what actions are needed to ensure more accurate epidemiological data and better clinical management of A/H patients.

Since the first description of anaphylaxis in 1902, its clinical importance as an emergency condition has been recognized worldwide. Anaphylaxis is a severe, potentially life-threatening systemic hypersensitivity reaction characterized by rapid onset and the potential to endanger life through respiratory or circulatory compromise. It is usually, although not always, associated with skin and mucosal changes. Although the academic/scientific communities have advocated to promote greater awareness and protocols for management of anaphylaxis based on best evidence, there are few efforts documenting feedback as to the success of these efforts. In this document, we review the key unmet needs related to the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis, propose a public health initiative for prevention measures and a timetable action plan which intends to strengthen the collaboration among health professionals and especially primary care physicians dealing with anaphylaxis that can encourage enhanced quality of care of patients with anaphylaxis. More than calling for harmonized action for best management of anaphylaxis to prevent undue morbidity and mortality, the Montpellier World Health Organization Collaborating Centre here proposes an action plan as a baseline for a global initiative against anaphylaxis. We strongly believe these collaborative efforts are a strong public health and societal priority that is consistent with the overarching goals of providing optimal care of allergic patients and best practices of allergology.