Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31073125›Full record

SynthesisNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2019

Systematic review of clinical prediction models to support the diagnosis of asthma in primary care.

Luke Daines, Susannah McLean, Audrey Buelo, Steff Lewis, Aziz Sheikh, Hilary Pinnock

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Exploring the role of cold air in airway hyperresponsiveness and asthma diagnostic testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Prediction Models for Maternal and Offspring Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Following Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Luke DainesAsthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. luke.daines@ed.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0564-4000
Susannah McLeanAsthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Audrey BueloScottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Steff LewisEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Aziz SheikhAsthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Hilary PinnockAsthma UK Centre for Applied Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CAF/17/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diagnosing asthma is challenging. Misdiagnosis can lead to untreated symptoms, incorrect treatment and avoidable deaths. The best combination of clinical features and tests to achieve a diagnosis of asthma is unclear. As asthma is usually diagnosed in non-specialist settings, a clinical prediction model to aid the assessment of the probability of asthma in primary care may improve diagnostic accuracy. We aimed to identify and describe existing prediction models to support the diagnosis of asthma in children and adults in primary care. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, TRIP and US National Guidelines Clearinghouse databases from 1 January 1990 to 23 November 17. We included prediction models designed for use in primary care or equivalent settings to aid the diagnostic decision-making of clinicians assessing patients with symptoms suggesting asthma. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. From 13,798 records, 53 full-text articles were reviewed. We included seven modelling studies; all were at high risk of bias. Model performance varied, and the area under the receiving operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.61 to 0.82. Patient-reported wheeze, symptom variability and history of allergy or allergic rhinitis were associated with asthma. In conclusion, clinical prediction models may support the diagnosis of asthma in primary care, but existing models are at high risk of bias and thus unreliable for informing practice. Future studies should adhere to recognised standards, conduct model validation and include a broader range of clinical data to derive a prediction model of value for clinicians.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision RulesAsthmaHumansPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID31073125
PMCPMC6509212

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.