Trial reportThe Journal of allergy and clinical immunology2013
Diagnostic accuracy of the bronchodilator response in children.
Trial report in The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Long-Term PMAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Pooled it
- Genome-wide association study of inhaled corticosteroid response in admixed children with asthma.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2019Trial
- Real-world feasibility of adapted European Respiratory Society asthma diagnosis guidelines for school-aged children.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Impact of varying childhood asthma definitions on incidence and clinical outcomes.Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2026Article
- Integrating blood eosinophils and exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) in asthma diagnostic pathways for adults and children: the PROPULSION SANTÉ observational study with translational sub-studies (DIVE, DIVE2)-protocols.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Article
- Bronchodilator Response of TEV/FEV3 and Its Implications in Pediatric Asthma.Allergy, asthma & immunology research · 2025Article
- Global burden of asthma among children and adolescents with projections to 2050: a comprehensive review and forecasted modeling study.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2025Article
- Race-Neutral Equations and Pulmonary Function Test Interpretation in Two Pediatric Cohorts.The Journal of pediatrics · 2024Article
- Association of GAB1 gene with asthma susceptibility and the efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids in children.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2023Article
- Association between severe bronchiolitis in infancy and age 6-year lung function.Respiratory medicine · 2023Article
- Neighborhood Conditions and Resources in Mid-Childhood and Dampness and Pests at Home in Adolescence.The Journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Effect of radon exposure on asthma morbidity in the School Inner-City Asthma study.Pediatric pulmonology · 2023Article
- Routine FEVBreathe (Sheffield, England) · 2023Review
- Intrauterine Smoke Exposure, microRNA Expression during Human Lung Development, and Childhood Asthma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Severe asthma in children: Description of a large multidisciplinary clinical cohort.Pediatric pulmonology · 2022Article
- Lung Function Tests, Quality of Life and Telemedicine: Three Windows on the Multifaceted World of Asthma in Adolescents.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Keeping Pace with Adolescent Asthma: A Practical Approach to Optimizing Care.Pulmonary therapy · 2022Article
- Childhood patterns of overweight and wheeze and subsequent risk of current asthma and obesity in adolescence.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2021Article
- Identification ofJournal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Pharmacogenetic Polygenic Risk Score for Bronchodilator Response in Children and Adolescents with Asthma: Proof-of-Concept.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe bronchodilator response (BDR) reflects the reversibility of airflow obstruction and is recommended as an adjunctive test to diagnose asthma. The validity of the commonly used definition of BDR, a 12% or greater change in FEV1 from baseline, has been questioned in childhood.
objectivesWe sought to examine the diagnostic accuracy of the BDR test by using 3 large pediatric cohorts.
methodsCases include 1041 children with mild-to-moderate asthma from the Childhood Asthma Management Program. Control subjects (nonasthmatic and nonwheezing) were chosen from Project Viva and Home Allergens, 2 population-based pediatric cohorts. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed, and areas under the curve were calculated for different BDR cutoffs.
resultsA total of 1041 cases (59.7% male; mean age, 8.9 ± 2.1 years) and 250 control subjects (46.8% male; mean age, 8.7 ± 1.7 years) were analyzed, with mean BDRs of 10.7% ± 10.2% and 2.7% ± 8.4%, respectively. The BDR test differentiated asthmatic patients from nonasthmatic patients with a moderate accuracy (area under the curve, 73.3%). Despite good specificity, a cutoff of 12% was associated with poor sensitivity (35.6%). A cutoff of less than 8% performed significantly better than a cutoff of 12% (P = .03, 8% vs 12%).
conclusionsOur findings highlight the poor sensitivity associated with the commonly used 12% cutoff for BDR. Although our data show that a threshold of less than 8% performs better than 12%, given the variability of this test in children, we conclude that it might be not be appropriate to choose a specific BDR cutoff as a criterion for the diagnosis of asthma.
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.