ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Global, regional and national estimates of the burden of childhood asthma attributable to NO
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 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.
- Phenotypic characterization of treatment-naïve childhood asthma with obesity: features of lung function, inflammation, and lipid profiles.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Environmental and socioeconomic influences on childhood asthma and pneumonia: burden and healthcare utilization in a population-based cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- COPD in Africa in the Post-COVID Era: A GBD 2023 Analysis of Trends, Demographic Drivers and Health-System Performance.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Asthma, a chronic lung condition characterised by inflammation and airway constriction, has been associated with nitrogen dioxide (NO Methods: We systematically reviewed epidemiological studies evaluating NO Findings: We identified a total of 27 cohort studies, spanning 12 countries, primarily in Europe and high-income North America, with some studies from Asia (China and Japan). A meta-regression log-linear risk curve of these studies produced a summary RR of 1.05 (95% UI 0.99-1.12) per 5 ppb NO Interpretation: NO Funding: The research described in this article was conducted in part under contract with the Health Effects Institute (HEI), an organization jointly funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and certain motor vehicle and engine manufacturers, grant number 4977/20-11. The contents of this article do not necessarily reflect the views of HEI or its sponsors, nor do they necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA or motor vehicle and engine manufacturers. Additional funding for this study was received by the Gates foundation, grant no. OPP1152504 for MB, KB, and SW. SA, DG, AM and GHK were supported by NASA grant no. 80NSSC21K0511 and SA and GHK NIH grant no. P20ES036775.
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.