ArticleItalian journal of pediatrics2025
Comparison of ERS/ATS guidelines across versions: differences in the application of bronchodilator responsiveness criteria in pediatric asthma by age subgroups (2005 vs 2021).
Article in Italian journal of pediatrics, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe 2021 updated guidelines revised the bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) positivity criteria to an increase in FEV₁ or FVC of > 10% of the predicted value. This new standard aims to reduce the impact of baseline lung function variability in determining BDR. However, it should be noted that supporting evidence for children and young adults is limited and thus cannot provide fully substantiated recommendations. The study systematically compare the test results of the BDR diagnostic criteria in the 2005 and 2021 versions of the ERS/ATS guidelines in a clinical setting in children of different age groups with asthma and to explore the reasons for the differences.
methodsThis was a single-center, retrospective, cross-sectional study. The applications of the 2005 and 2021 versions of BDR standards in different age groups(4-5 years, 6-11 years, 12-18 years) with asthma was compared, the lung-function characteristics of children with inconsistent results were analyzed, and the trend of the proportion of BDR + changing with the degree of airflow obstruction was analyzed.
resultsA total of 1,525 children with asthma were included in this study. There is a significant difference in the number of inconsistent group between the two methods (P < 0.01). In each age group, the number of people in the 2005 + 2021- group was higher than that in the 2005-2021 + group. The kappa consistency test revealed the kappa values of all age groups to be > 0.80 (P < 0.01) and consistent. The inconsistent group had lower lung-function values than the consistent group. The 2005BDR-2021BDR + group of lung-function values were higher than 2005BDR + 2021BDR- group. The analysis revealed that only Z-FEV1 (OR = 0.773, 95% CI: 0.650 to 0.919, p = 0.004) was an independent factor of Inconsistent results.The trends of 2005BDR + and 2021BDR + were consistent with the degree of airflow obstruction, indicating a weak positive correlation.
conclusionsThe kappa test showed that the results of 2005BDR and 2021BDR were consistent, but there were differences between the inconsistent groups. Z-FEV1 is an independent factor affecting the inconsistent results, so baseline data is the main reason for the inconsistent results of the two methods. The 2021BDR standard may reduce the influence of baseline lung function when determining the results. The positive rate obtained based on the two evaluation criteria maintained the same trend with the degree of airflow obstruction. All showed a weak positive correlation.
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.