ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Association between maternal smoking during pregnancy and recurrent wheezing in infancy: evidence from a meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A review of common influencing factors and possible mechanisms associated with allergic diseases complicating tic disorders in children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Review
- Risk factors for recurrent wheezing in preterm infants who received prophylaxis with palivizumab.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2021Article
- Smoke-free legislation and child health.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuantification of the association between the maternal smoking during pregnancy and recurrent wheezing in infancy is still conflicting. Thus, we performed a comprehensive meta-analysis to test the hypothesis that maternal smoking during pregnancy may increase the risk of recurrent wheezing in infancy.
methodsPertinent studies were identified by a search in PubMed and Web of Knowledge up to October 2014. Random-effect model (REM) or fixed effects model (FEM) was used to combine study-specific results. Publication bias was estimated using Egger's regression asymmetry test.
resultsSeven articles (3 cohort study and 4 cross-sectional studies) involving 8579 recurrent wheezing infant cases about maternal smoking during pregnancy and recurrent wheezing risk were used in this meta-analysis. The combined relative risks (RRs) of recurrent wheezing infants associated with maternal smoking during pregnancy was 1.491 (95% CIs = 1.329-1.672) overall. Significant associations were found both in Europe [RRs = 1.471, 95% CIs = 1.287-1.681] and other populations [RRs = 1.720, 95% CIs = 1.119-2.644] and cross-sectional studies [RRs = 1.474, 95% CIs = 1.306-1.663]. No publication bias was found.
conclusionsOur analysis indicated that maternal smoking during pregnancy could increase the risk of recurrent wheezing in infancy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26221213PMC4509158What 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.