4.2 Article

A Simple Tool to Identify Infants at High Risk of Mild to Severe Childhood Asthma: The Persistent Asthma Predictive Score

期刊

JOURNAL OF ASTHMA
卷 48, 期 10, 页码 1015-1021

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/02770903.2011.626481

关键词

allergy; asthma; infant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Recurrent wheezing in infants is a recognized risk factor for the development of childhood asthma. We sought to develop an easy-to-use persistent asthma predictive score (PAPS) in a population of young recurrent wheezers. Methods. We retrospectively studied clinical and biological data of infants under 2 years of age presenting recurrent wheezing and evaluated current asthma at 6 years of age using the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) questionnaire. Multivariate analysis was performed to select predictive variables to generate a PAPS. The score was then tested on another cohort for independent validation. Results. Two hundred infants were included in the cohort used to create the PAPS, and 227 in the validation cohort. In the first population, 47% of the children had developed asthma at 6 years of age, including 33% with mild to severe persistent asthma. Three parameters independently predicted persistent asthma: family history of asthma, personal atopic dermatitis, and multiple allergen sensitizations. Based on these variables, the PAPS showed 42% sensitivity, 90% specificity, 67% positive predictive value, and 76% negative predictive value for the prediction of persistent asthma. It was able to discriminate future persistent asthmatic from nonfuture persistent asthmatic children, with an accuracy of 74% in the initial population and 67% in the validation population. Conclusions. The PAPS, based on three easy-to-obtain variables, could help the physician in clinical practice to identify infants at high risk for persistent childhood asthma, and thus better evaluate the need for secondary preventive measures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据