ArticleBMJ open2017
Models for estimating and projecting global, regional and national prevalence and disease burden of asthma: protocol for a systematic review.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Influenza-associated disease burden in mainland China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Models for estimating and projecting global, regional and national prevalence and disease burden of asthma: a systematic review.Journal of global health · 2020Pooled it
- Alcohol consumption's attributable disease burden and cost-effectiveness of targeted public health interventions: a systematic review of mathematical models.BMC public health · 2019Pooled it
- Exercise training as an adjunctive therapy to montelukast in children with mild asthma: A randomized controlled trial.Medicine · 2019Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionModels that have so far been used to estimate and project the prevalence and disease burden of asthma are in most cases inadequately described and irreproducible. We aim systematically to describe and critique the existing models in relation to their strengths, limitations and reproducibility, and to determine the appropriate models for estimating and projecting the prevalence and disease burden of asthma.
methodsWe will search the following electronic databases to identify relevant literature published from 1980 to 2017: Medline, Embase, WHO Library and Information Services and Web of Science Core Collection. We will identify additional studies by searching the reference list of all the retrieved papers and contacting experts. We will include observational studies that used models for estimating and/or projecting prevalence and disease burden of asthma regarding human population of any age and sex. Two independent reviewers will assess the studies for inclusion and extract data from included papers. Data items will include authors' names, publication year, study aims, data source and time period, study population, asthma outcomes, study methodology, model type, model settings, study variables, methods of model derivation, methods of parameter estimation and/or projection, model fit information, key findings and identified research gaps. A detailed critical narrative synthesis of the models will be undertaken in relation to their strengths, limitations and reproducibility. A quality assessment checklist and scoring framework will be used to determine the appropriate models for estimating and projecting the prevalence anddiseaseburden of asthma. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We will not collect any primary data for this review, and hence there is no need for formal National Health Services Research Ethics Committee approval. We will present our findings at scientific conferences and publish the findings in the peer-reviewed scientific journal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.