Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33550231›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

EstablishINg the best STEp-up treatments for children with uncontrolled asthma despite INhaled corticosteroids (EINSTEIN): protocol for a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis using individual participant data (IPD).

Sofia Cividini, Ian Sinha, Sarah Donegan, Michelle Maden, Giovanna Culeddu, Katie Rose, Olive Fulton, Dyfrig A Hughes, Stephen Turner, Catrin Tudur Smith

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 48% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sofia CividiniDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2705-9224
Ian SinhaAlder Hey Children's Foundation NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7342-5523
Sarah DoneganDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1709-2290
Michelle MadenLiverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRIG), University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4419-6343
Giovanna CuledduCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5032-4255
Katie RoseAlder Hey Children's Foundation NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2348-2036
Olive FultonPatient Representative, Liverpool, UK.
Dyfrig A HughesCentre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8247-7459
Stephen TurnerDepartment of Child Health, University Court of the University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8393-5060
Catrin Tudur SmithDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK cat1@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3051-1445
University of Liverpool · GBAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust · GBBangor University · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

Department of Health 16/110/16
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAsthma affects millions of children worldwide-1.1 million children in the UK. Asthma symptoms cannot be cured but can be controlled with low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in the majority of individuals. Treatment with a low-dose ICS, however, fails to control asthma symptoms in around 10%-15% of children and this places the individual at increased risk for an asthma attack. At present, there is no clear preferred treatment option for a child whose asthma is not controlled by low-dose ICS and international guidelines currently recommend at least three treatment options. Herein, we propose a systematic review and individual participant data network meta-analysis (IPD-NMA) aiming to synthesise all available published and unpublished evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to establish the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological treatments in children and adolescents with uncontrolled asthma on ICS and help to make evidence-informed treatment choices. This will be used to parameterise a Markov-based economic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative treatment options in order to inform decisions in the context of drug formularies and clinical guidelines. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, NICE Technology Appraisals and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment series for RCTs of interventions in patients with uncontrolled asthma on ICS. All studies where children and adolescents were eligible for inclusion will be considered, and authors or sponsors will be contacted to request IPD on patients aged <18. The reference lists of existing clinical guidelines, along with included studies and relevant reviews, will be checked to identify further relevant studies. Unpublished studies will be located by searching across a range of clinical trial registries, including internal trial registers for pharmaceutical companies. All studies will be appraised for inclusion against predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria by two independent reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. We will perform an IPD-NMA-eventually supplemented with aggregate data for the RCTs without IPD-to establish both the probability that a treatment is best and the probability that a particular treatment is most likely to be effective for a specific profile of the patient. The IPD-NMA will be performed for each outcome variable within a Bayesian framework, using the WinBUGS software. Also, potential patient-level characteristics that may modify treatment effects will be explored, which represents one of the strengths of this study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Committee on Research Ethics, University of Liverpool, has confirmed that ethics review is not required. The dissemination plan consists of publishing the results in an open-access medical journal, a plain-language summary available for parents and children, dissemination via local, national and international meetings and conferences and the press offices of our Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). A synopsis of results will be disseminated to NICE and British Thoracic Society/Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) as highly relevant to future clinical guideline updates. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019127599.

Indexed as

Adrenal Cortex HormonesAsthmaAdolescentAgedChildCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicAdrenal Cortex Hormonesasthmaepidemiologypaediatricsstatistics & research methods

Identifiers

PMID33550231
PMCPMC7925932
OpenAlexW3127883866

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.