ReviewPulmonary therapy2019
Asthma Diagnosis: The Changing Face of Guidelines.
Review in Pulmonary therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Superior Benefits of Combining Mepolizumab With Sinus Surgery Compared to Mepolizumab Alone: Results From a Randomised 6-Month Trial.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2025Trial
- Review
- Examining the diagnostic validity of the ISAAC asthma questionnaire among participants from Singapore and Malaysia.Asia Pacific allergy · 2025Article
- Article
- Perillyl alcohol (PA) mitigates inflammatory, oxidative, and histopathological consequences of allergic asthma in rats.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2023Article
- A Charter to Fundamentally Change the Role of Oral Corticosteroids in the Management of Asthma.Advances in therapy · 2023Review
- Deriving and validating an asthma diagnosis prediction model for children and young people in primary care.Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Article
- Exhaled volatilome analysis as a useful tool to discriminate asthma with other coexisting atopic diseases in women of childbearing age.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Protocol for the derivation and validation of a clinical prediction model to support the diagnosis of asthma in children and young people in primary care.Wellcome open research · 2020Article
- The Potential of Clinical Decision Support Systems for Prevention, Diagnosis, and Monitoring of Allergic Diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Asthma, the most common chronic respiratory disease, is frequently misdiagnosed, and accounts for a significant proportion of healthcare expenditure. This has driven the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom (UK) to produce recent guidance; in places, this contrasts to that of the British Thoracic Society/Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (BTS/SIGN), which have been producing their own guidance since 2003. Here we review the history of asthma diagnostic guidelines, and compare and review the evidence behind them, in adults and in children. We discuss the definitions of asthma and how these drive the concepts behind diagnostic strategies. We anticipate future directions in asthma diagnosis which will take into account the concepts of personalised medicine and disease endotypes. We also consider the utility of tests in use now and in the future, in particular novel tests relating to small airway inflammation and obstruction.
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.