Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27852249›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

Assessment of work-related asthma prevalence, control and severity: protocol of a field study.

Hermine Mével, Valérie Demange, Emmanuelle Penven, Christian Trontin, Pascal Wild, Christophe Paris

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 83% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hermine MévelINRS, Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Valérie DemangeINRS, Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France. valerie.demange@inrs.fr.ORCID 0000-0003-2945-2564
Emmanuelle PenvenEA7298 INGRES, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France.
Christian TrontinINRS, Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Pascal WildINRS, Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Christophe ParisEA7298 INGRES, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France.
Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité · FRDélégation Centre-Est · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are still uncertainties regarding the respective prevalence, diagnosis and management of occupational asthma (OA) and work-exacerbated asthma (WEA). There is as yet no standardized methodology to differentiate their diagnosis. A proper management of both OA and WEA requires tools for a good phenotyping in terms of control, severity and quality of life in order to propose case-specific therapeutical and preventive measures. Moreover, there is a lack of knowledge concerning their actual costs.

methodsThis project aims at comparing 3 groups of asthmatic subjects at work: subjects with OA, with WEA, and with non-work-related asthma (NWRA) in terms of control, severity and quality of life on the one hand, and estimating the prevalence of OA, WEA and NWRA in active workers and the economic costs of OA and WEA, on the other hand. Control will be assessed using the Asthma Control Test questionnaire and the daily Peak Exploratory Flow variability, severity from the treatment level, and quality of life using the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. A first step will be to apply a standardized diagnosis procedure of WEA and OA. This study includes an epidemiological part in occupational health services by volunteering occupational physicians, and a clinical case-study based on potentially asthmatic subjects referred to ten participating University Hospital Occupational Diseases Departments (UHODD) because of a suspected WRA. The subjects' characterization with respect to OA and WEA is organized in three steps. In Step 1 (epidemiological part), occupational physicians screen for potentially actively asthmatics through a questionnaire given to workers seen in mandatory medical visit. In step 2 (both parts), the subjects with a suspicion of work-related respiratory symptoms answer a detailed questionnaire and perform a two-week OASYS protocol enabling us, using a specifically developed algorithm, to classify them into probably NWRA, suspected OA, suspected WEA. The two latter groups are referred to UHODD for a final harmonized diagnosis (step 3). Finally, direct and indirect disease-related costs during the year preceding the diagnosis will be explored among WRA cases, as well as these costs and the intangible costs, during the year following the diagnosis. DISCUSSION: This project is an attempt to obtain a global picture of occupational asthma in France thanks to a multidisciplinary approach.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessAdultAsthmaAsthma, OccupationalClinical ProtocolsDisease ProgressionFemaleFranceHealth Care CostsHumansMalePrevalenceQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAsthma controlAsthma diagnosisAsthma quality of lifeAsthma severityMedico-economical evaluationOccupational asthmaOccupational epidemiologyWork-exacerbated asthmaWork-related asthma

Identifiers

PMID27852249
PMCPMC5112681
OpenAlexW2550816855

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.