Cargando…

Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION: Work-related asthma (WRA) refers to asthma caused by exposures at work (occupational asthma) and asthma made worse by work conditions (work-exacerbated asthma). WRA is common among working-age adults with asthma and impacts individual health, work–life and income but is often not detec...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kongsupon, Ngamjit, Walters, Gareth I, Adab, Peymané, Jordan, Rachel E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9511564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36153029
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058054
_version_ 1784797668302651392
author Kongsupon, Ngamjit
Walters, Gareth I
Adab, Peymané
Jordan, Rachel E
author_facet Kongsupon, Ngamjit
Walters, Gareth I
Adab, Peymané
Jordan, Rachel E
author_sort Kongsupon, Ngamjit
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Work-related asthma (WRA) refers to asthma caused by exposures at work (occupational asthma) and asthma made worse by work conditions (work-exacerbated asthma). WRA is common among working-age adults with asthma and impacts individual health, work–life and income but is often not detected by healthcare services. Earlier identification can lead to better health and employment outcomes. However, the optimal tool for screening and its effectiveness in practice is not well established. Screening tools may include whole questionnaires, questionnaire items, physiological measurements and/or immunological tests. Since the publication of the most contemporary WRA or occupational asthma-specific guidelines, further studies evaluating tools for identifying WRA have been performed. Our systematic review aims to summarise and compare the performance of screening tools for identifying WRA in both clinical and workplace settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of observational and experimental studies (1975–2021) using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, CDSR, DARE, HTA, CISDOC databases and grey literature. Two independent reviewers will screen the studies using predetermined criteria, extract data according to a schedule and assess study quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Test Accuracy 2 tool. Screening tools and test accuracy measures will be summarised. Paired forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic curves of sensitivities and specificities will be evaluated for heterogeneity between studies, using subgroup analyses, where possible. If the studies are sufficiently homogenous, we will use a bivariate random effect model for meta-analysis. A narrative summary and interpretation will be provided if meta-analysis is not appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this is a systematic review and does not involve primary data collection, formal ethical review is not required. We will disseminate our findings through open access peer-reviewed publication as well as through other academic and social media. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021246031.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9511564
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95115642022-09-27 Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol Kongsupon, Ngamjit Walters, Gareth I Adab, Peymané Jordan, Rachel E BMJ Open Respiratory Medicine INTRODUCTION: Work-related asthma (WRA) refers to asthma caused by exposures at work (occupational asthma) and asthma made worse by work conditions (work-exacerbated asthma). WRA is common among working-age adults with asthma and impacts individual health, work–life and income but is often not detected by healthcare services. Earlier identification can lead to better health and employment outcomes. However, the optimal tool for screening and its effectiveness in practice is not well established. Screening tools may include whole questionnaires, questionnaire items, physiological measurements and/or immunological tests. Since the publication of the most contemporary WRA or occupational asthma-specific guidelines, further studies evaluating tools for identifying WRA have been performed. Our systematic review aims to summarise and compare the performance of screening tools for identifying WRA in both clinical and workplace settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of observational and experimental studies (1975–2021) using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, CDSR, DARE, HTA, CISDOC databases and grey literature. Two independent reviewers will screen the studies using predetermined criteria, extract data according to a schedule and assess study quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Test Accuracy 2 tool. Screening tools and test accuracy measures will be summarised. Paired forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic curves of sensitivities and specificities will be evaluated for heterogeneity between studies, using subgroup analyses, where possible. If the studies are sufficiently homogenous, we will use a bivariate random effect model for meta-analysis. A narrative summary and interpretation will be provided if meta-analysis is not appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this is a systematic review and does not involve primary data collection, formal ethical review is not required. We will disseminate our findings through open access peer-reviewed publication as well as through other academic and social media. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021246031. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9511564/ /pubmed/36153029 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058054 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Respiratory Medicine
Kongsupon, Ngamjit
Walters, Gareth I
Adab, Peymané
Jordan, Rachel E
Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol
title Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol
title_full Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol
title_fullStr Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol
title_full_unstemmed Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol
title_short Screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol
title_sort screening tools for work-related asthma and their diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review protocol
topic Respiratory Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9511564/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36153029
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058054
work_keys_str_mv AT kongsuponngamjit screeningtoolsforworkrelatedasthmaandtheirdiagnosticaccuracyasystematicreviewprotocol
AT waltersgarethi screeningtoolsforworkrelatedasthmaandtheirdiagnosticaccuracyasystematicreviewprotocol
AT adabpeymane screeningtoolsforworkrelatedasthmaandtheirdiagnosticaccuracyasystematicreviewprotocol
AT jordanrachele screeningtoolsforworkrelatedasthmaandtheirdiagnosticaccuracyasystematicreviewprotocol