M20 Can measures of small airway dysfunction aid with the diagnosis or management of asthma exacerbations? – A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Asthma exacerbations are diagnosed and monitored using clinical features and forced airways manoeuvres which can be difficult for patients to perform. Tests assessing small airways function might provide more nuanced information about the exacerbation and response to treatment, and this systematic review (SR) evaluated the evidence to support these tests during adult asthma exacerbations. Methods The SR followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024494994). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL with no time or language restrictions. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (observational studies). A narrative synthesis was conducted due to methodological heterogeneity. Results Seven studies (six observational, one RCT) involving 634 adults with asthma exacerbations met inclusion criteria. Five studies assessed Forced Expiratory Flow (FEF) at 25%–75% of the pulmonary volume, one reported FEF25/50/75, and one used multiple-breath washout (MBW). Most studies were exploratory and limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneous methodologies, and incomplete statistical reporting, including inconsistent use of group comparisons and varied follow-up durations. No study used small airway tests as a primary diagnostic tool, and statistical significance was inconsistently reported. Risk of bias was notable across all studies. All studies reported a good ability for patients to perform tests of small airways during exacerbations. All reported impaired small airway function during exacerbations with improvements at follow-up (taken 2 to 8 weeks after the initial presentation). Most reported a greater improvement in FEF25–75 than in FEV1 (Increments in FEF25–75 of 152%, 124%, and 99.7% and 80%, 62%, and 54% in FEV1). MBW indices were elevated during exacerbations and declined during recovery, with a strong inverse correlation between Sacin and FEV1 (ρ=–0.67, p=.006). One RCT (n=36) evaluated bronchodilator response with or without non-invasive ventilation, showing modest post-treatment changes in FEF25–75. Conclusion Tests of small airway function are feasible during asthma exacerbations and may detect clinically relevant changes. It remains unclear which test may be optimal and whether tests of small airways function during exacerbation enhance early diagnosis or treatment monitoring.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".