Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25709510›Full record

ReviewMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2015

Inhalation drug delivery devices: technology update.

Mariam Ibrahim, Rahul Verma, Lucila Garcia-Contreras

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

116 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Advances in Inhaled Nanoparticle Drug Delivery for Pulmonary Disease Management.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mariam IbrahimDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
Rahul VermaDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
Lucila Garcia-ContrerasDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pulmonary route of administration has proven to be effective in local and systemic delivery of miscellaneous drugs and biopharmaceuticals to treat pulmonary and non-pulmonary diseases. A successful pulmonary administration requires a harmonic interaction between the drug formulation, the inhaler device, and the patient. However, the biggest single problem that accounts for the lack of desired effect or adverse outcomes is the incorrect use of the device due to lack of training in how to use the device or how to coordinate actuation and aerosol inhalation. This review summarizes the structural and mechanical features of aerosol delivery devices with respect to mechanisms of aerosol generation, their use with different formulations, and their advantages and limitations. A technological update of the current state-of-the-art designs proposed to overcome current challenges of existing devices is also provided.

Indexed as

asthmadry powder inhalermetered dose inhalernebulizerspulmonary delivery

Identifiers

PMID25709510
PMCPMC4334339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.