ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2013
Diagnostic approach in cases with suspected work-related asthma.
Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2013. 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oscillometry in Asthma: Respiratory Modeling and Analysis in Occupational and Work-Exacerbated Phenotypes.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2024Article
- Work-related asthma: A position paper from the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand and the National Asthma Council Australia.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2020Review
- Occupational asthma and rhinitis due to wheat flour: sublingual specific immunotherapy treatment.La Medicina del lavoro · 2020Article
- Workplace interventions for treatment of occupational asthma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Review
- Review
- Assessment of work-related asthma prevalence, control and severity: protocol of a field study.BMC public health · 2016Article
- Allergy-related disorders in the construction industry.ISRN preventive 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
7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWork-related asthma (WRA) is a major cause of respiratory disease in modern societies. The diagnosis and consequently an opportunity for prevention are often missed in practice.
methodsBased on recent studies and systematic reviews of the literature methods for detection of WRA and identification of specific causes of allergic WRA are discussed. RESULTS AND
conclusionsAll workers should be asked whether symptoms improve on days away from work or on holidays. Positive answers should lead to further investigation. Spirometry and non-specific bronchial responsiveness should be measured, but carefully performed and validly analysed serial peak expiratory flow or forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) measurements are more specific and confirm occupational asthma in about 82% of those still exposed to the causative agent. Skin prick testing or specific immunoglobulin E assays are useful to document allergy to high molecular weight allergens. Specific inhalational challenge tests come closest to a gold standard test, but lack standardisation, availability and sensitivity. Supervised workplace challenges can be used when specific challenges are unavailable or the results non-diagnostic, but methodology lacks standardisation. Finally, if the diagnosis remains unclear a follow-up with serial measurements of FEV1 and non-specific bronchial hyperresponsiveness should detect those likely to develop permanent impairment from their occupational exposures.
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.