ArticleClinical reviews in allergy & immunology2021
New Instrument for the Evaluation of Prodromes and Attacks of Hereditary Angioedema (HAE-EPA).
Article in Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical expressions, disease course, quality of life, and resilience in subgroups of patients with angioedema.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- Article
- The impact of puberty on the onset, frequency, location, and severity of attacks in hereditary angioedema due to C1-inhibitor deficiency: A survey from the Italian Network for Hereditary and Acquired Angioedema (ITACA).Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- The international WAO/EAACI guideline for the management of hereditary angioedema - The 2021 revision and update.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2022Article
- The Enigma of Prodromes in Hereditary Angioedema (HAE).Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A disease-specific, patient-reported outcome instrument suitable for evaluation of prodromes and attacks of hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a clinical unmet need. We constructed such instrument and examined its validity, acceptability, and discriminative ability. Sixty-six patients participated in a survey addressing their demographics, social, and medical status. Discriminant content validity involved: (1) construct definition by in-depth cognitive debriefing interviews, (2) item selection identifying relevant categories, and (3) judgment of the format whereby questionnaires were tested on experienced patients and its content/reliability was validated. Prodromes and attacks affecting certain body systems (domains) were organized in "clusters". Internal consistency, content, and convergent validities were analyzed. Analyses of variance and regression models were used to evaluate the discriminative ability of the instrument to differentiate between attacks and prodromes. The study demonstrates very high internal consistency (Cronbach's α: attacks 0.88-0.98, prodromes 0.78-0.98). Analysis of variance confirmed significant differences between all dimensions and in pre-defined clusters (F (4, 61) = 45.74, p < 0.001, Eta
Indexed as
Identifiers
33538950What 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.