Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38410137›Full record

ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2024

What is the Best Way to Diagnose Possible Asthma Patients with Negative Bronchodilator Reversibility Tests?

Buket Başa Akdoğan, Ilkay Koca Kalkan, Gözde Köycü Buhari, Özlem Özdedeoğlu, Hale Ateş, Kurtuluş Aksu, Ferda Öner Erkekol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Buket Başa AkdoğanDepartment of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-2919-6660
Ilkay Koca KalkanDepartment of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Gözde Köycü BuhariDepartment of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Özlem ÖzdedeoğluDepartment of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Hale AteşDepartment of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Kurtuluş AksuDepartment of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-6195-1158
Ferda Öner ErkekolDepartment of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The best method and strategy for the diagnosis of asthma remains unclear, especially in patients with negative bronchodilator reversibility test (BDRT). In our study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic yield of peak expiratory flow (PEF) variability for this patient group. Methods: A total of 50 patients with suspected asthma, all with negative BDR test, were included in the study. Demographic information and symptoms were recorded and PEF variability was monitored for 2 weeks. Metacolinbronchial provocation test (mBPT) was performed. Asthma was diagnosed when PEF variability ≥20% and/or positive mBPT was observed. Results: 30 of 50 patients were diagnosed with asthma. After 1 month, 17 patients were evaluated for treatment outcomes. The sensitivity and specificity of PEF variability for different cut-off values (≥20%, >15% and >10%) were 61.5-83.3, 88.5-62.5 and 100-16.7, respectively. One of the most important findings of our study was the absence of variable airflow limitation or airway hyper reactivity in 39% patients with a previous diagnosis of asthma. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that a low baseline FEF Conclusion: The most efficient diagnostic test for asthma is still unclear due to many factors. Our study is one of the few studies on this subject. Although current diagnostic recommendations generally recommend a PEF variability of 10% for the diagnosis of asthma, this threshold may not be appropriate for the BDR-negative patient group. Our results suggest using a threshold value of <15% for PEF variability when excluding asthma and ≥20% when confirming the diagnosis of asthma in patients with clinically suspected but unproven reversibility. Furthermore, FEF

Indexed as

bronchial challenge testdiagnosis of asthmaforced expiratory flow (25-75%)peak expiratory flow (PEF) variabilityreversibility

Identifiers

PMID38410137
PMCPMC10895991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.