SynthesisBMJ open2024
Multivariate time series approaches to extract predictive asthma biomarkers from prospectively patient-collected diary data: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLongitudinal data are common in asthma studies, to assess asthma progression in patients and identify predictors of future outcomes, including asthma exacerbations and asthma control. Different methods can quantify temporal behaviour in prospective patient-collected diary variables to obtain predictive biomarkers of asthma outcomes. The aims of this systematic review were to evaluate methods for extracting biomarkers from longitudinally collected diary data in asthma and investigate associations between them and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients with asthma.
designSystematic review and narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 2000 and July 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Included studies generated biomarkers from prospective patient-collected peak expiratory flow, symptom scores, reliever use and nocturnal awakenings, and evaluated their associations with asthma PROs, namely asthma exacerbations, asthma control, asthma-related quality of life and asthma severity. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to screen and extract data from included studies. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) and the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASessment Tool (PROBAST), respectively.
results24 full-text articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Generally, higher levels of variability in the diary variables were associated with poorer outcomes, especially increased asthma exacerbation risk, and poor asthma control. There was increasing interest in non-parametric methods to quantify complex behaviour of diary variables (6/24). TRIPOD and PROBAST highlighted a lack of consistent reporting of model performance measures and potential for model bias.
conclusionProspectively patient-collected diary variables aid in generating asthma assessment tools, including surrogate endpoints, for clinical trials and predictive biomarkers of adverse outcomes, warranting remote monitoring. Studies consistently lacked robust reporting of model performance. Future research should use diary variable-derived biomarkers.
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.