Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26576132›Full record

ArticleClinical and molecular allergy : CMA2015

Asthma under/misdiagnosis in primary care setting: an observational community-based study in Italy.

Maria Sandra Magnoni, Marco Caminati, Gianenrico Senna, Fabio Arpinelli, Andrea Rizzi, Anna Rita Dama, Michele Schiappoli, Germano Bettoncelli, Gaetano Caramori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and molecular allergy : CMA, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The role of spirometry in the management of obstructive airways disease: How pharmacists should get involved.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC
    Article
  10. Article
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

9 authors.

Maria Sandra MagnoniMedical and Scientific Department, GlaxoSmithKline, Verona, Italy.
Marco CaminatiAllergy Unit, Verona University and General Hospital, Piazzale Stefani 1, 37126 Verona, Italy.
Gianenrico SennaAllergy Unit, Verona University and General Hospital, Piazzale Stefani 1, 37126 Verona, Italy.
Fabio ArpinelliMedical and Scientific Department, GlaxoSmithKline, Verona, Italy.
Andrea RizziMedical and Scientific Department, GlaxoSmithKline, Verona, Italy.
Anna Rita DamaAllergy Unit, Verona University and General Hospital, Piazzale Stefani 1, 37126 Verona, Italy.
Michele SchiappoliAllergy Unit, Verona University and General Hospital, Piazzale Stefani 1, 37126 Verona, Italy.
Germano BettoncelliSocietà Italiana di Medicina Generale, Florence, Italy.
Gaetano CaramoriDipartimento di Scienze Mediche, Sezione di Medicina Interna e Cardiorespiratoria, Centro Interdipartimentale per lo Studio delle Malattie Infiammatorie delle Vie Aeree e Patologie Fumo-Correlate (CEMICEF, formerly termed Centro), Università di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublished data suggest that asthma is significantly under/misdiagnosed. The present community-based study performed in Italy aims at investigating the level of asthma under/misdiagnosis among patients referring to the General Practitioner (GP) for respiratory symptoms and undergoing Inhaled corticosteroids.

methodsA sub-analysis of a previously published observational cross-sectional study has been provided. It included subjects registered in the GP databases with at least three prescriptions of inhaled or nebulised corticosteroids during the 12 months preceding the start of the study. All subjects, independently of the diagnosis, were invited to visit their GP's office for a standardised interview and to fill the European Community Respiratory Health Survey (ECRHS) questionnaire.

resultsThe studies involved 540 GPs in most of the Italian regions and 2090 subjects (mean age 54.9 years, 54.1 % females) were enrolled. Among them 991 cases of physician-diagnosed asthma were observed while 1099 subjects received a diagnosis other than asthma (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic upper respiratory tract infections etc.). Among the lasts, the ECRHS questionnaire was suggestive for asthma diagnosis in 365 subjects (33.2 %).

conclusionsThe data suggest that there is still a large under/misdiagnosis of asthma in the Italian primary care setting, despite the spread of GINA guidelines nearly 20 years before this study. A validated tool like the ECRHS questionnaire has detected a considerable proportion of potentially asthmatic patients who should be addressed to lung function assessment to confirm the diagnosis. Further educational efforts directed to the GPs are needed to improve their diagnosis of asthma (SAM104964).

Indexed as

AsthmaECRHS questionnaireMisdiagnosisPrimary careUnder diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID26576132
PMCPMC4645473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.