ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2024
Disease Modification in Asthma: Are We on the Right Way? A Multidisciplinary Expert Delphi Consensus (MODIASTHMA Consensus).
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. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multidisciplinary management of interstitial lung disease in autoimmune rheumatic diseases: an Italian Delphi consensus.Respiratory research · 2026Article
- Feasibility of a 50% Dosing Interval Extension of Anti-IL-5 Biologics in Patients with Severe Asthma in Clinical Remission: A Real-World Validation Study.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: With the advent of biological therapies, emerging concepts regarding establishing new targets in asthma management, such as disease modification, have entered the debate among the scientific community. The definitions that form the conceptual basis of this goal need to be agreed upon. Methods: A multidisciplinary expert group was assembled as the steering committee. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify the scientific background for constructing appropriate definitions. Based on the literature review and the clinical experience of the experts, the committee built a list of statements that could be applied to establish the definition of disease modification in asthma. After that, a Delphi validation was performed to assess the appropriateness of the list of statements. The questionnaire included a total of 22 statements, divided into "Essential criteria for disease modification in asthma" (5 statements) and "Disease modification indicators and other considerations" (17 statements). Panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to measure agreement on each statement. The cut-off point for high consensus was defined as a minimum score of 7 and had to be reached by at least two-thirds of the experts. Results: A total of 192 asthma experts voted on statements anonymously. Of those, 104 (54%) were Pneumologists, 65 (34%) were allergologists, and 23 (12%) were Pediatricians. An interim analysis of round 1 data was performed. All statements reached consensus on the first round, with a median score above 7 in all cases. Conclusion: In conclusion, in this Delphi study, a large number of experts in the management of severe asthma from different specialties agreed on the clinical-functional and pathophysiological aspects to be considered in order to try to achieve disease modification.
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.