ArticleAllergy, asthma & immunology research2011
Assessment of bronchodilator responsiveness following methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction in children with asthma.
Article in Allergy, asthma & immunology research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different Development Forms of Local Allergic Rhinitis towards Birch.BioMed research international · 2020Trial
- Polygenic heritability estimates in pharmacogenetics: focus on asthma and related phenotypes.Pharmacogenetics and genomics · 2013Article
- Assessment of bronchodilator responsiveness after methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction.Allergy, asthma & immunology research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to investigate bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) following methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction and to determine differences in BDR according to clinical parameters in children with asthma.
methodsThe methacholine challenge test was performed in 145 children with mild to moderate asthma, and the provocative concentration causing a 20% decline in FEV1 (PC20) was determined. Immediately after the challenge test, patients were asked to inhale short-acting β2-agonists (SABAs) to achieve BDR, which was assessed as the change in FEV1% predicted×100/post-methacholine FEV1% predicted. For each subject, the asthma medication, blood eosinophil count, serum total IgE, serum eosinophil cationic protein level, and skin prick test result were assessed.
resultsThe FEV1 (mean±SD) values of the 145 patients were 90.5±10.9% predicted, 64.2±11.5% predicted, and 86.2±11.2% predicted before and after methacholine inhalation, and following the administration of a SABA, respectively. The BDR did not differ significantly according to asthma medication, age, or gender. However, BDR in the atopy group (37.4±17.7%) was significantly higher than that in the non-atopy group (30.5±10.7%; P=0.037). Patients with blood eosinophilia (38.6±18.1%) displayed increased BDR compared with patients without eosinophilia (32.0±13.8%; P=0.037).
conclusionsIn children with mild to moderate asthma, the responsiveness to short-acting bronchodilators after methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction was not related to asthma medication, but was higher in children with atopy and/or peripheral blood eosinophilia.
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.