ArticleClinical and translational allergy2024
Monitoring recurrent angioedema: Findings from the Turkish angioedema control test validation study.
Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heterogeneity in clinical appearance of chronic spontaneous urticaria: A cross-sectional analysis of a retrospective cohort.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- A Comprehensive Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Hereditary Angioedema as a Patient-Centered Approach.International archives of allergy and immunology · 2026Article
- Association Between the Angioedema Control Test and Attack Frequency in Hereditary Angioedema.Clinical and translational allergy · 2026Article
- Monitoring recurrent angioedema: Findings from the Turkish angioedema control test validation study.Clinical and translational allergy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDetermination of control level in recurrent angioedema (RAE) is necessary to guide management. Here, we validated a Turkish version of the angioedema control test (AECT) for 4-week (AECT-4wk) and for 3-month (AECT-3mth) and assessed their utility in monitoring RAE.
methodThe recommended structured translation process for patient-reported outcome measures was completed. The final versions were administered to 51 patients with mast cell-mediated angioedema (MMAE) and 38 patients with hereditary angioedema, and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was determined. Additionally, anchor surveys comprising angioedema activity score for 28 days (AAS-28 day), visual analog score for angioedema control, Likert scale for the control level from the patient's perspective (LS-AEC), angioedema quality of life, short form-12 (SF-12) and patients' assessment of treatment sufficiency were applied.
resultsThe Turkish AECT versions showed good convergent validity with a substantial correlation with anchor tools and known-group validity. Excellent internal consistency and reproducibility were observed. Equal or more than 10 of 16 points scored with the AECT-4wk and AECT-3mth identified patients with well-controlled disease. The disease activity, control and burden parameters were consistent with the disease control level defined depending on the cut-off point 10 of AECT. Three-point changes in AECT-4wk and -3 mt could detect MCID in disease control in all patients.
conclusionsTurkish AECT versions are valid and reliable tools for assessing and monitoring disease control in patients with RAE. The use of the Turkish versions of the AECT in routine patient care, clinical trials and angioedema research is recommended.
Indexed as
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.