ArticleERJ open research2024
Clinical efficacy and satisfaction of a digital wheeze detector in a multicentre randomised controlled trial: the WheezeScan study.
Article in ERJ open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Objective detection of wheeze at home by parents through a digital device: usage patterns and relationship with SABA administration.Pediatric pulmonology · 2025Trial
- Digital health and artificial intelligence in paediatric respiratory medicine: what clinicians need to know and what is coming next.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2026Review
- Improving asthma control assessment and outcomes in children with asthma using an artificial intelligence digital tool: a prospective multicentre cohort study.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Improving the management and outcomes of preschool wheeze: protocol of a prospective multicentre cohort study.BMJ open respiratory research · 2026Article
- Digitally mapping the asthma journey-from diagnosis to remission.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence and wheezing in children: where are we now?Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Wheezing is common in preschool children and its clinical assessment often challenging for caretakers. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a novel digital wheeze detector (WheezeScan™) on disease control in a home care setting. Methods: A multicentre randomised open-label controlled trial was conducted in Berlin, Istanbul and London. Participants aged 4-84 months with a doctor's diagnosis of recurrent wheezing in the past 12 months were included. While the control group followed usual care, the intervention group received the WheezeScan™ for at-home use for 120 days. Parents completed questionnaires regarding their child's respiratory symptoms, disease-related and parental quality of life, and caretaker self-efficacy at baseline (T0), 90 days (T1) and 4 months (T2). Results: A total of 167 children, with a mean±sd age of 3.2±1.6 years, were enrolled in the study (intervention group n=87; control group n=80). There was no statistically significant difference in wheeze control assessed by TRACK (mean difference 3.8, 95% CI -2.3-9.9; p=0.2) at T1 between treatment groups (primary outcome). Children's and parental quality of life and parental self-efficacy were comparable between both groups at T1. The evaluation of device usability and perception showed that parents found it useful. Conclusion: In the current study population, the wheeze detector did not show significant impact on the home management of preschool wheezing. Hence, further research is needed to better understand how the perception and usage behaviour may influence the clinical impact of a digital support.
Identifiers
What 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.