Observational studyArchives of disease in childhood2025
Analysis of the asthma scores recommended in guidelines for children presenting to the emergency department: a Pediatric Emergency Research Networks study.
Observational study in Archives of disease in childhood, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Respiratory Support in Pediatric Critical and Near-Fatal Asthma: A Narrative Review.Pulmonary therapy · 2026Review
- Clinical Effectiveness of Nebulized Magnesium Sulfate in Pediatric Acute Asthma: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Asthma Hospitalizations in Children Before and After COVID-19: Insights from Northern Colombia.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleWhile there are numerous published paediatric asthma scores, it is unknown how commonly scores are recommended in asthma guidelines across different geographical regions globally, and what their validation status is.
objectives(1) To describe which clinical guidelines recommend asthma scores across different geographical regions. (2) To describe the initial and subsequent validation of the commonly recommended asthma scores.
methodsObservational study of asthma scores recommended in guidelines for the management of acute paediatric asthma from institutions across the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Network; global paediatric emergency medicine research network comprising all eight local and regional paediatric emergency medicine research networks. MAIN
results158 guidelines were identified. Overall, 83/158 (53%) guidelines recommend a bedside clinical score for assessment of asthma severity. While a single country-specific clinical score was recommended in all guidelines from Spain and Canada, 27/28 (96%) of the USA guidelines recommend a wide variety of scores, and scores are rarely recommended in guidelines from other research networks (PERUKI, Paediatric Emergency Research in the UK and Ireland and PREDICT, Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative in Australia and New Zealand) and other countries (Costa Rica, South Africa, Nigeria, Singapore, India).The Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) and the pulmonary score (PS) were the most frequently used scoring instruments. While the PRAM has undergone the most extensive validation, including construct validity, validation studies for the PS are limited. Inter-rater reliability, as well as the criterion, responsiveness and discriminative validity aspects represent the most common limitations in many of the scores.
conclusionsThere are marked geographical differences in both the recommendation for and the type of clinical asthma score in clinical practice guidelines. While many asthma scores are recommended, most have insufficient validation.
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.