Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33510985›Full record

ArticleCureus2020

Are the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Guidelines Being Correctly Used to Diagnose Severe Asthma in the UAE?

Mohamed Abuzakouk, Sonya Jacob, Omar Ghorab

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. LncRNAs ENST00000499459 and TCONS_00004989 enhance asthma progression in children with house dust mite-induced allergic asthma.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2022
    Article
  5. Over-prescription of short-acting βAsthma research and practice · 2022
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohamed AbuzakoukAllergy and Immunology, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, ARE.
Sonya JacobAllergy and Immunology, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, ARE.
Omar GhorabAllergy and Immunology, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, ARE.
Cleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives We aimed to identify the percentage inaccuracy in classifying asthma severity as severe asthma based on the 2019 Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines criteria, at Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, and make recommendations to improve the assessment of asthma severity. Methods All asthma patients that attended the Pulmonology clinic or the Allergy clinic from May 2015 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed to identify which asthma patients classified as having severe asthma according to the 2019 GINA guidelines criteria. We then calculated the percentage inaccuracy associated with giving diagnoses of severe asthma. Results We retrospectively analyzed a total of 902 patients, and out of those, we identified 334 as patients with severe asthma according to the 2019 GINA guidelines criteria. Of those 334 patients, 218 were given an incorrect asthma severity of either mild (N=14), moderate (N=203), or unspecified asthma severity (N=1) in the hospital's electronic records. This represents a percentage inaccuracy of 65.3% in classifying asthma severity as severe asthma. Fluticasone propionate-salmeterol was the most used ICS-LABA (inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist) medication in the severe asthma group (58.1%). Fluticasone furoate-vilanterol was identified as the most incorrectly prescribed ICS-LABA medication (68.2%). Conclusion We identified an inaccuracy of 65.3% in classifying asthma severity as severe at our hospital. This inaccuracy is associated with a lack of understanding of the GINA guidelines by clinicians, as well as a lack of acceptance of some of the criteria in the GINA guidelines by patients. We have made recommendations to help improve the accuracy of asthma severity assessment, in order to be fully adherent to the GINA guidelines criteria.

Indexed as

asthmaclinical auditgina guidelinessevere asthma

Identifiers

PMID33510985
PMCPMC7828644
OpenAlexW3113668981

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.