Evidence mapPaperPMID 40743508Full record

ArticleJMIR pediatrics and parenting2025

Validation and Acceptability of the Mobile App Version of the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test for Children (CARATKids): Cross-Sectional Study.

Dulce Abreu da Mata, Inês Pais-Cunha, Sandra Catarina Ferraz, Daniela da Rocha Couto, Catarina Ferraz, Sónia Silva, José Carlos Valente, Pedro Vieira-Marques, João A Fonseca, Inês Azevedo and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR pediatrics and parenting, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test for Children (CARATkids): A systematic review and meta-analysis of its measurement properties.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Dulce Abreu da Mata *Unidade Autónoma de Gestão da Mulher e Criança, Pediatrics Department, Unidade Local de Saúde São João, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-3944-3822
Inês Pais-Cunha *Unidade Autónoma de Gestão da Mulher e Criança, Pediatrics Department, Unidade Local de Saúde São João, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5368-0335
Sandra Catarina FerrazPediatrics Department, Unidade Local de Saúde do Alto Minho, Viana do Castelo, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6274-6076
Daniela da Rocha CoutoPediatrics Department, Unidade Local de Saúde da Cova da Beira, Covilhã, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6905-6593
Catarina FerrazUnidade Autónoma de Gestão da Mulher e Criança, Pediatrics Department, Unidade Local de Saúde São João, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7835-3402
Sónia SilvaUnidade Autónoma de Gestão da Mulher e Criança, Pediatrics Department, Unidade Local de Saúde São João, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9920-1184
José Carlos ValenteMEDIDA - Serviços em Medicina, Educação, Investigação, Desenvolvimento e Avaliação, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3967-3838
Pedro Vieira-MarquesRISE-Health, MEDCIDS- Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Plácido da Costa, Porto, 4200-450, Portugal, 351 225513622.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4174-2820
João A FonsecaMEDIDA - Serviços em Medicina, Educação, Investigação, Desenvolvimento e Avaliação, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0887-8796
Inês AzevedoUnidade Autónoma de Gestão da Mulher e Criança, Pediatrics Department, Unidade Local de Saúde São João, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0090-8612
Cristina JácomeRISE-Health, MEDCIDS- Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Plácido da Costa, Porto, 4200-450, Portugal, 351 225513622.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1151-8791

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The electronic version of the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test for Children (CARATKids) has the potential to enhance pediatric telemonitoring but has not yet been validated. Objective: This study aimed to validate the electronic version of CARATKids against the paper-based version. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted between April and December 2024 in a tertiary hospital in northern Portugal. Children with asthma or allergic rhinitis and their caregivers were recruited during pulmonology outpatient appointments. CARATKids comprises 13 yes or no questions, 8 addressed to the child and 5 to the caregiver, and the total score ranges from 0 to 13. The electronic CARATKids was made available through a mobile app. Both paper and electronic versions were administered in a randomized order before and after the appointment. In addition, participants' preferences between the two administration versions were assessed. Internal consistency (Cronbach α), reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], Bland-Altman analysis), and convergent validity (Spearman coefficient) were analyzed following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Results: A total of 51 children (median 9, IQR 8-11 years; n=29, 57% male) and respective caregivers (median 41, IQR 7-45) years were included. The CARATKids total score was similar across the paper (median 5, IQR 3-8) and electronic (median 5, IQR 3-7) versions. The internal consistency was 0.79 for the paper version and 0.83 for the electronic version. The reliability between the two versions was excellent (ICC 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.97). The Bland-Altman analysis showed strong agreement between the two versions, with a mean difference of 0.04 (95% CI -1.99 to 2.07). The Spearman correlation between the two versions was 0.95 (P<.001). In total, 63% (n=32) of children and 61% (n=31) of caregivers were indifferent to the version used, while 33% (n=17) and 35% (n=18), respectively, preferred the electronic version. Conclusions: The electronic version of CARATKids appears to be equivalent to the paper-based version of the questionnaire, with good acceptance by children and caregivers. CARATKids implementation in mobile health technologies has the potential to enhance remote child monitoring and optimize the management of asthma and allergic rhinitis.

Indexed as

asthmamobile applicationsmobile phonepatient preferencepatient-reported outcome measurespediatricspsychometricsreliabilityrhinitis, allergictelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID40743508
PMCPMC12313081

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.