Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33871340›Full record

ReviewTurkish thoracic journal2021

Inhalation Challenge Tests in Occupational Asthma: Why Are Multiple Tests Needed?

Bilge Akgündüz Üzmezoğlu

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Turkish thoracic journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Bilge Akgündüz ÜzmezoğluDepartment of Occupational Diseases, Atatürk Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9398-5173
Chest Diseases Hospital · KW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Occupational and environmental lung diseases are on the rise because of the widespread use of various toxic agents in industry. Asthma etiopathogenesis is unclear because of exposure to high and low molecular agents in workplaces. Approximately 15-25% of asthma in adults is reported to be related to occupational exposure. The prevalence of occupational asthma (OA) is predicted to be high. The difficulties in diagnosing OA results in inadequate treatment, permanent airway damage, and medicolegal and social problems. As with other occupational diseases, it is necessary to demonstrate a direct causal relationship between the suspected agent and OA. Spirometry, peak expiratory flow rate, and/or non-specific bronchial hyperresponsiveness are frequently used to show airway hyperresponsiveness at the workplace and away from work. However, there are some controversies about the specificity and sensitivity of these test methods. Furthermore, these tests do not identify the exposure agent, which could be the causative agent. Specific inhalation challenge (SIC) tests that demonstrate the direct causal relationship are currently the gold standard. However, their positive and negative predictive values have not yet been established; therefore, many low molecular weight agents could cause late or atypical reactions. Therefore, a negative SIC test cannot exclude the disease. This review describes the procedures for the SIC test and discusses the importance of using the combined test methods with the SIC test.

Identifiers

PMID33871340
PMCPMC8051293
OpenAlexW3140217024

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.