SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013
Dehumidifiers for chronic asthma.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of non-drug therapies on asthma control: A systematic review of the literature.The European journal of general practice · 2019Pooled it
- Review
- Questionnaire for Clinical Diagnosis of House Dust Mite's Allergy Approved by Delphi Consensus.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2025Article
- Update on House Dust Mite Allergen Avoidance Measures for Asthma.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2020Review
- A meta-analysis of baseline characteristics in trials on mite allergen avoidance in asthmatics: room for improvement.Clinical and translational allergy · 2020Review
- The Role of Home Environments in Allergic Disease.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2019Review
- A reintroduction of environmental mite allergen control strategies for asthma treatment and the debate on their effectiveness.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2019Review
- International consensus (ICON) on: clinical consequences of mite hypersensitivity, a global problem.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2017Article
- Cochrane plain language summaries are highly heterogeneous with low adherence to the standards.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
- Environmental assessment and exposure control of dust mites: a practice parameter.Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2013Article
- Home Environmental Interventions for House Dust Mite.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practiceReview
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHumidity control measures in the home environment of patients with asthma have been recommended, since a warm humid environment favours the growth of house dust mites. However, there is no consensus about the usefulness of these measures.
objectivesTo study the effect of dehumidification of the home environment on asthma control. SEARCH
methodsThe clinical trials registers of the Cochrane Collaboration and Cochrane Airways Group were searched. Searches were current as of March 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials on the use of humidity control measures in the home environment of patients with asthma were evaluated for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted independently using a pre-designed data extraction form by two review authors. MAIN
resultsA second trial has been added for the 2013 update of this review. The original open-label trial compared an intervention consisting of mechanical ventilation heat recovery system with or without high efficiency vacuum cleaner fitted in 40 homes of patients with asthma who had positive tests for sensitivity to house dust mite. The new double-blind trial also compared a mechanical ventilation heat recovery system with a placebo machine in the homes of 120 adults with allergy to house dust mite. The new trial, which was at low risk of bias, showed no significant difference in morning peak flow (mean difference (MD) 13.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.66 to 29.84), which was the primary outcome of the trial. However, there was a statistically significant improvement in evening peak flow only (MD 24.56; 95% CI 8.97 to 40.15). There was no significant difference in quality of life, rescue medication, requirement for oral corticosteroids, visits to the GP, emergency department (ED) or hospitalisations for asthma. There was no significant difference in the house dust mite count and the antigen levels in the new trial, in contrast to the previous trial. AUTHORS'
conclusionsEvidence on clinical benefits of dehumidification using mechanical ventilation with dehumidifiers remains scanty, and the addition of a new double blind trial to this review does not indicate significant benefit in most measure of control of asthma from such environmental interventions.
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.