Meglio 2013.

Methods	Randomized controlled trial, controlled open study
Participants	20 children, aged 4 years to 14 years, with mild‐to‐severe IgE‐mediated HEA, according to Clark’s severity classification, were admitted. All fulfilled the inclusion criteria of being more than four yrs of age and having an IgE‐mediated HEA: positive hen's egg skin prick tests (SPTs) or hen's egg IgE > 0.35 kUA/L confirmed by means of double‐blind, placebo‐controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) or a convincing history
Interventions	The schedule consisted of administering increasing amounts of raw hen's egg starting from one drop (mixed egg white and yolk) diluted 1:100 with water, corresponding to 0.27 mg of hen's egg proteins. The hen's egg doses were doubled every 8 days until day 80. Subsequently, the hen's egg doses were doubled every 16 days to achieve a total daily intake of 25 mL, in 6 months. The protocol was suspended when the child reached 25 mL/day or the maximum tolerated dose, that is to say the dose that did not induce any symptom and that was established after the third attempt to continue with the desensitization protocol (the parents tried to administer the same dose, which caused symptoms three times, so the previous tolerated dose was considered the maximum tolerated dose). Control: hen egg‐free diet.
Outcomes	To desensitize children with moderate‐severe IgE‐mediated hen's egg allergy over a 6‐month period The skin prick tests with egg white and yolk‐specific serum IgEs (REAST method) to ovomucoid (Gal d 1) and ovalbumin (Gal d 2) specific serum IgEs (ISAC method) to ovomucoid (Gal d 1), ovalbumin (Gal d 2), ovotransferrin (Gal d 3), lysozyme (Gal d 4) and serum albumin (Gal d 5) serum‐specific IgG4 to ovomucoid (Gal d 1) and ovalbumin (Gal d 2) Serum cytokine levels Adverse effects
Vested interest	This information was not available
Notes	Funding information was not available
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	By means of a computerized randomization schedule, the participants were randomly assigned to either intervention or control
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Computerized randomization schedule
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Unblinded intervention
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Unblinded intervention
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No missing data
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Study protocol not available and therefore selective outcome reporting could not be assessed