ReviewCurrent opinion in allergy and clinical immunology2009
Asthma in preschool children: the next challenge.
Review in Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Preschool Wheezing: Guideline from the Emilia-Romagna Asthma (ERA) Study Group.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Symptom-based screening tool for asthma syndrome among young children in Uganda.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2020Article
- Wheezing in preschool children.Early human development · 2013Review
- Diagnosis of allergy and asthma in childhood.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2011Review
- High prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among inner-city African American youth with asthma in Washington, DC.The Journal of pediatrics · 2010Article
- Prevalence, incidence and persistence of anti-asthma medication use in 2- to 29-year-olds: a nationwide prescription study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2010Article
- The use of inhaled corticosteroid in preschool wheezers: what's the point today?Italian journal of pediatrics · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewTo describe a prospective classification for preschool wheezers according to temporal symptom pattern, and summarize findings relating to the management of viral wheeze and the use of short-term therapy for intermittent severe wheeze. RECENT
findingsPhenotypes defined from cohort studies should only be applied retrospectively at school age. A new classification that can be applied prospectively is discussed. The importance of early rhinovirus-induced wheezing as a risk factor for asthma has become apparent. However, there is no benefit from short-course oral steroids for acute viral wheeze in the majority of cases. There is conflicting evidence for the role of intermittent montelukast or inhaled steroids in the treatment of acute, intermittent wheeze. A link between reduced vitamin D intake during pregnancy and increased preschool wheeze in offspring has emerged, suggesting a potential role for vitamin D supplementation in primary prevention. SUMMARY: On the basis of current evidence, a trial of bronchodilators is first-line therapy for viral wheeze, and maintenance montelukast or inhaled steroids may be considered in preschool wheezers with persistent symptoms and risk factors for future asthma. No disease-modifying therapies are available. New therapeutic options for preschool wheezing disorders are desperately needed.
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.