ReviewClinical and translational allergy2025
Expert opinion on gray areas in asthma management: A lesson from the innovative project "revolution in asthma" of the Italian thoracic society (AIPO-ITS).
Review in Clinical and translational allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Expert opinion on gray areas in asthma management: A lesson from the innovative project "revolution in asthma" of the Italian thoracic society (AIPO-ITS).Clinical and translational allergy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the availability of numerous guidelines for asthma management, their recommendations are not consistently implemented in clinical practice. This discrepancy between guidelines and real-world practice among Italian healthcare professionals was explored during the "Revolution in Asthma" training program, which identified "gray areas" and barriers preventing clinicians from adopting guideline-based approaches.
objectiveThis study aims to analyze the key challenges in asthma management and provide evidence-based solutions to improve adherence to guidelines in clinical practice.
methodsA group of experts from the Scientific Committee of the Revolution in Asthma project reviewed the program's findings, focusing on three main areas of asthma management: diagnosis, control, and treatment. The experts summarized clinicians' main needs and questions for each area and provided evidence-based responses and practical recommendations.
resultsThe study highlights critical challenges in asthma treatment, addressing two key questions: (a) What are the possible uses and indications for short-acting β-agonists in asthma patients? (b) How should asthma treatment be initiated and adjusted based on asthma control? The expert panel developed practical, operational tools to support general practitioners and specialists (pulmonologists and allergists) in optimizing asthma management.
conclusionThis paper serves as a knowledge co-creation initiative, bridging the gap between clinical guidelines and daily practice. By offering concrete recommendations, it aims to enhance the application of guideline-based asthma management among healthcare professionals.
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.