Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32936802›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Three questions for identifying chemically intolerant individuals in clinical and epidemiological populations: The Brief Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (BREESI).

Raymond F Palmer, Carlos R Jaén, Roger B Perales, Rodolfo Rincon, Jacqueline N Forster, Claudia S Miller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Italian Expert Consensus on Clinical and Therapeutic Management of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Validation of a Brief Screening Instrument for Chemical Intolerance in a Large U.S. National Sample.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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 1 institution in 1 country.

Raymond F PalmerDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6621-9038
Carlos R JaénDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.
Roger B PeralesDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.
Rodolfo RinconDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.
Jacqueline N ForsterDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.
Claudia S MillerDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (QEESI) is a validated questionnaire used worldwide to assess intolerances to chemicals, foods, and drugs, and has emerged as the gold standard for assessing chemical intolerance (CI). Despite a reported prevalence of 8-33%, epidemiological studies and routine primary care clinics rarely assess CI. To help address this gap, we developed the Brief Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (BREESI)-a 3-item CI screening tool. We tested the BREESI's potential to predict whether an individual is likely to be classified as chemically intolerant if administered the 50-item QEESI. We recruited 293 participants from a university-based primary care clinic and through online participation. The statistical sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the BREESI were calculated against the validated QEESI. Ninety percent (90%) of participants answering "yes" to all three items on the BREESI fit the QEESI criteria for being very suggestive of CI based upon their chemical intolerance and symptom scores (positive predictive value = 90%). For participants endorsing two items, 93% were classified as either very suggestive (39%) or suggestive (54%) of CI (positive predictive value = 87%). Of those endorsing only one item, 13% were classified as very suggestive of CI, and 70% as suggestive. Of those answering "No" to all of the BREESI items, 95% were classified as not suggestive of CI (i.e., negative predictive value = 95%). The BREESI is a versatile screening tool for assessing potential CI useful for clinical and epidemiological applications, based upon individuals' past adverse responses in a variety of settings. Just as health care professionals routinely inquire about latex allergy to prevent adverse reactions, the BREESI provides an essential screen for CI. Together, the BREESI and QEESI provide new diagnostic tools that may help predict and prevent future adverse reactions to chemicals, foods, and drugs.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Tests, RoutineMass ScreeningAdultEnvironmental ExposureFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMultiple Chemical SensitivityPrevalenceROC CurveSurveys and QuestionnairesTexas

Identifiers

PMID32936802
PMCPMC7494077
OpenAlexW3087569138

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.