ArticleFrontiers in allergy2025
Use of oral corticosteroids in patients with asthma: how far is clinical practice from the guidelines? Results from surveys of patients and doctors.
Article in Frontiers in allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Investigation of Biomarkers in Allergic Patients with Long COVID.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Asthma is often treated with oral corticosteroids (OCS), despite their association with significant adverse effects. While guidelines recommend minimizing OCS use through alternative therapies and patient-centered approaches, discrepancies between recommendations and real-world practices persist. This study evaluates OCS usage patterns and barriers to adherence to asthma treatment guidelines in Italy, using surveys conducted with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients. Methods: Two cross-sectional surveys were administered between January and March 2024 to HCPs and asthma patients. The surveys assessed OCS prescription practices, treatment adherence, patient involvement, adverse event management, and perceptions of OCS use. Descriptive analysis was performed to identify patterns and highlight gaps in current practices. Results: The surveys revealed considerable variability in OCS prescribing practices, treatment duration and daily dosages. Over 80% of patients reported using OCS and 18% of HCPs believed that the maximum daily doses of OCS are higher than the guideline-recommended doses. Patients did not feel fully involved in treatment decisions, with over 40% of patients reporting unsatisfactory communication about treatment alternatives or adverse effects. Barriers to optimal care included inadequate access to specialists, inconsistent monitoring protocols, and a lack of multidisciplinary approaches. Both HCPs and patients highlighted the need for clearer definitions of OCS dependency and enhanced tools for tracking treatment adherence. Discussion: The findings underscore the urgent need for systemic reforms to align clinical practice with guidelines. These include establishing pragmatic definitions for OCS dependency, promoting multidisciplinary care, and leveraging technology for monitoring. Addressing psychosocial factors and empowering patients through education and shared decision-making are also critical.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.