ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2011
Endpoints in respiratory diseases.
Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Radiomics of the Airway (RadAr): Multi-Scale Airway Phenotyping for Disease Characterization on Routine CT Imaging.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Development and content validation of a self-completed, electronic Pediatric Asthma Symptom Diary.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
- Choosing primary endpoints for clinical trials of health care interventions.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2019Review
- Preschool children with persistent asthmatic symptoms.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2019Review
- Novel end points for clinical trials in young children with cystic fibrosis.Expert review of respiratory medicine · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A wide range of outcome measures or endpoints has been used in clinical trials to assess the effects of treatments in paediatric respiratory diseases. This can make it difficult to compare treatment outcomes from different trials and also to understand whether new treatments offer a real clinical benefit for patients. Clinical trials in respiratory diseases evaluate three types of endpoints: subjective, objective and health-related outcomes. The ideal endpoint in a clinical trial needs to be accurate, precise and reliable. Ideally, the endpoint would also be measured with minimal risk and across all ages, easy to perform, and be inexpensive. As for any other disease, endpoints for respiratory diseases must be viewed in the context of the important distinction between clinical endpoints and surrogate endpoints. The association between surrogate endpoints and clinical endpoints must be clearly defined for any disease in order for them to be meaningful as outcome measures. The most common endpoints which are used in paediatric trials in respiratory diseases are discussed. For practical purposes, diseases have been separated into acute (bronchiolitis, acute viral-wheeze, acute asthma and croup) and chronic (asthma and cystic fibrosis). Further development of endpoints will enable clinical trials in children with respiratory diseases with the main objective of improving prognosis and safety.
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.