ArticleJournal of arthropod-borne diseases2017
House Dust Mite Prevalence in the House of Patients with Atopic Dermatitis in Mashhad, Iran.
Article in Journal of arthropod-borne diseases, 2017. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating Forkhead Box O Transcription Factor 1 Gene's Relation to Immunoglobulin E in House Dust Mite-Allergic Asthma Patients.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2023Article
- Profile of aeroallergen sensitizations in allergic patients living in southern Vietnam.Frontiers in allergy · 2022Article
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBeing exposed to house dust mites intensifies atopic dermatitis. This study has investigated the contamination rate with
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, 40 patients took part with atopic dermatitis (positive or negative for mites by prick Dermal Test). Samples were collected from 3 locations (living room, bedroom and bed) by vacuum cleaner. Dust samples (transferred to freezer -20 °C) were examined by direct method and flotation. The data were analyzed using statistical SPSS vr.20 software.
resultsTwenty patients of positive prick test included 8 (40%) male and 12 (60%) female. The results of direct observation of mites: 7 cases (35%) in bedding sheets, 6 cases (30%) bedrooms' carpet, 3 cases (15%) living room's carpet. Twenty patients of negative prick test included 8 (40%) male and 12 (60%) female. Only mites were found (5%) in living room's carpets of negative prick test patients.
conclusionFifty-five percent of residential homes of prick test positive patients and only 5% of residential homes of prick test negative patients were positive for mite. Sunshine provided home had fewer mites than home where sunshine is not provided. Prick test positive patients used handmade carpets more than machine made ones. In positive prick test patients, mites were found in bed sheet and bedroom's carpet more than negative prick test patient's sheets and carpets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29062855PMC5641619W2580172648What 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.