Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27757158›Full record

ReviewObstetric medicine2013

Asthma in pregnancy: a review.

Warwick Giles, Vanessa Murphy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Obstetric medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Interventions for managing asthma in pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Preclinical models of maternal asthma and progeny outcomes: a scoping review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Treatment of Illnesses Arising in Pregnancy.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017
    Article
  12. 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

2 authors.

Warwick GilesDirector Maternal Fetal Medicine, Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit, Division of Women's Children's and Family Health, Royal North Shore Hospital, Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, St Leonards NSW 2065, Australia.
Vanessa MurphyNHMRC Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, Centre for Asthma and Respiratory Diseases, University of Newcastle and Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW 2310, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Asthma is one of the most common medical conditions in women of childbearing age. There are now data to show that asthma is not a benign condition with respect to maternal and fetal health. Despite this there are several problems encountered in the management of such women. There is a tendency to cease or reduce optimal asthma treatments because pregnant women and/or their clinicians may believe they pose a risk to the fetus. There is also a lack of clinician awareness of the complications of asthma in pregnancy.

Indexed as

allergyasthmadrugs (medication)high-risk pregnancymaternal-fetal medicinepregnancy

Identifiers

PMID27757158
PMCPMC5052768

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.