4.6 Article

Management of asthma in childhood: study protocol of a systematic evidence update by the Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048338

关键词

paediatrics; asthma; paediatric thoracic medicine; thoracic medicine

资金

  1. Respiratory Effectiveness Group (REG)
  2. AstraZeneca
  3. Novartis
  4. Sanofi
  5. National Institute for Health Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR Manchester BRC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The PeARL Think Tank aims to develop clinical recommendations for childhood asthma based on the best available evidence from studies in children. They will conduct systematic reviews on maintenance therapy and treatments for acute asthma attacks in children, with the goal of informing clinical practice and improving outcomes for pediatric asthma patients.
Introduction Clinical recommendations for childhood asthma are often based on data extrapolated from studies conducted in adults, despite significant differences in mechanisms and response to treatments. The Paediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank aspires to develop recommendations based on the best available evidence from studies in children. An overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on paediatric asthma maintenance management and an SR of treatments for acute asthma attacks in children, requiring an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission will be conducted. Methods and analysis Standard methodology recommended by Cochrane will be followed. Maintenance pharmacotherapy of childhood asthma will be evaluated in an overview of SRs published after 2005 and including clinical trials or real-life studies. For evaluating pharmacotherapy of acute asthma attacks leading to an emergency presentation with/without hospital admission, we opted to conduct de novo synthesis in the absence of adequate up-to-date published SRs. For the SR of acute asthma pharmacotherapy, we will consider eligible SRs, clinical trials or real-life studies without time restrictions. Our evidence updates will be based on broad searches of Pubmed/Medline and the Cochrane Library. We will use A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, V.2, Cochrane risk of bias 2 and REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool to evaluate the methodological quality of SRs, controlled clinical trials and real-life studies, respectively. Next, we will further assess interventions for acute severe asthma attacks with positive clinical results in meta-analyses. We will include both controlled clinical trials and observational studies and will assess their quality using the previously mentioned tools. We will employ random effect models for conducting meta-analyses, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess certainty in the body of evidence. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required for SRs. Our findings will be published in peer reviewed journals and will inform clinical recommendations being developed by the PeARL Think Tank. PROSPERO registration numbers CRD42020132990, CRD42020171624.

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

4.6
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