ArticlePloS one2013
A twin study of early-childhood asthma in Puerto Ricans.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Critical Review of Statistical Methods for Twin Studies Relating Exposure to Early Life Health Conditions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Ambient Air Pollution and Asthma-Related Outcomes in Children of Color of the USA: a Scoping Review of Literature Published Between 2013 and 2017.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2018Article
- Pulmonary Disease and Age at Immigration among Hispanics. Results from the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2016Article
- Children's Inter-Individual Variability and Asthma Development.International journal of health sciences · 2015Review
- What the Genetic Background of Individuals with Asthma and Obesity Can Reveal: Is β2-Adrenergic Receptor Gene Polymorphism Important?Pediatric allergy, immunology, and pulmonology · 2014Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe relative contributions of genetics and environment to asthma in Hispanics or to asthma in children younger than 3 years are not well understood.
objectiveTo examine the relative contributions of genetics and environment to early-childhood asthma by performing a longitudinal twin study of asthma in Puerto Rican children ≤ 3 years old.
methods678 twin infants from the Puerto Rico Neo-Natal Twin Registry were assessed for asthma at age 1 year, with follow-up data obtained for 624 twins at age 3 years. Zygosity was determined by DNA microsatellite profiling. Structural equation modeling was performed for three phenotypes at ages 1 and 3 years: physician-diagnosed asthma, asthma medication use in the past year, and ≥ 1 hospitalization for asthma in the past year. Models were additionally adjusted for early-life environmental tobacco smoke exposure, sex, and age.
resultsThe prevalences of physician-diagnosed asthma, asthma medication use, and hospitalization for asthma were 11.6%, 10.8%, 4.9% at age 1 year, and 34.1%, 40.1%, and 8.5% at 3 years, respectively. Shared environmental effects contributed to the majority of variance in susceptibility to physician-diagnosed asthma and asthma medication use in the first year of life (84%-86%), while genetic effects drove variance in all phenotypes (45%-65%) at age 3 years. Early-life environmental tobacco smoke, sex, and age contributed to variance in susceptibility.
conclusionOur longitudinal study in Puerto Rican twins demonstrates a changing contribution of shared environmental effects to liability for physician-diagnosed asthma and asthma medication use between ages 1 and 3 years. Early-life environmental tobacco smoke reduction could markedly reduce asthma morbidity in young Puerto Rican children.
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.