Assess the quality of the asthma comparative effectiveness literature to identify evidence for consideration by future guideline developers
Evaluation and validation of oscillometry in terms of clinical value and reliability in routine patient care
The REG / EAACI Taskforce aims to conduct a systematic critical review of the real-life asthma literature between 2009–13 and write a report describing the current quality of real-life research in asthma; highlighting studies worthy of possible integration into asthma-related guidelines and policy decisions, and recommending quality targets for the future.
The critical appraisal of the evidence will involve the following core components:
Based on a review of published quality standards (e.g. extended CONSORT, STROBE, REG quality standards, etc), quality checklists and scoring tools for pragmatic trials and observational studies will be developed.
Identification of real-life asthma studies published in peer review journals during the last 5 years (2009–13), and of the main research question(s) addressed in these studies.
Categorization of published studies using the proposed REG framework (in press with the Lancet Respiratory Medicine), i.e., in terms of the extent to which their (a) study population and (b) management approach reflect real-life. Based on their position within the REG framework, identification of the relevant quality appraisal tools to assess the quality of the categorized studies.
Application of the relevant assessment tools and taskforce’s quality scoring tool, resulting in up- or down-grading of the level of evidence provided by these studies on the considered research question(s).
Comparison of populations, settings, characteristics of care and results between selected high-quality real-life studies and RCTs addressing the same research question(s).
Identification of areas where real-life asthma research could add to RCTs’ results.
Synthesis and publication of the findings, with special interest on where and how the evidence retrieved from real-life research complements evidence from RCTs and could, therefore, be considered when developing guidelines.
David Price, Nikos Papadopoulos, Leif Bjermer, Dermot Ryan, Helen Reddel, Maarten van den Berge, Guy Brusselle, John Haughney, Mike Thomas, Marc MIravitlles, Eric van Ganse, Jerry Krishnan