Trial reportIndian journal of pediatrics2007
Randomized trial of spacers in asthma.
Trial report in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Peak Flow Meter and Spacer Use in Adolescents with Asthma: More than Just Ownership.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Rationale for Going Back to the Future: Use of Disposable Spacers for Pressurised Metered Dose Inhalers.Pulmonary medicine · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of all types of spacers commonly available to children in India.
methods150 children 5-14 yr of age with persistent asthma presenting with peak expiratory flow (PEF) < 70% of personal best were randomized to receive 200 mg salbutamol through one of five spacers: A) 750 ml spacer with valve, B) 165 ml spacer with valve, C) 250 ml spacer without valve, D) 1000 ml indigenously made spacer without valve and E) 500 ml indigenously made spacer without valve. PEF measurement was repeated 15 minutes later. Children> 8 yr old performed spirometry in addition to PEF. Absolute change and percentage improvement of PEF and FEV1 were compared among the groups.
resultsSubjects in all groups had comparable baseline demographic characteristics and PEF. All showed significant improvement in PEF and FEV1 over baseline values. The change in PEF and percentage improvement were comparable among all five groups (p=0.780 and p=0.955 respectively). Likewise change in FEV1 and percentage improvement were also comparable. The five groups showed no difference in efficacy, irrespective of severity of baseline airway obstruction.
conclusionThe five spacers were equally efficacious for the delivery of bronchodilator in children with moderate persistent asthma presenting with airway obstruction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.