SynthesisBMC pediatrics2025
Efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions for childhood asthma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChildhood asthma is a prevalent chronic respiratory disease. While inhaled corticosteroids and β-agonists remain cornerstone treatments, growing evidence highlights the complementary role of non-pharmacological interventions in improving asthma outcomes. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy of diverse non-pharmacological approaches through a network meta-analysis (NMA).
methodsSeven English and Chinese databases were searched from their inception to April 1, 2025, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to non-pharmacological intervention in childhood asthma. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB). Network meta-analysis was conducted using R 4.2.0 and Stata 14.0 software.
resultsA total of 41 studies with 3164 participants were included. Involved structured exercise programs, controlled breathing techniques, traditional moxibustion therapy, psychological interventions, and traditional therapeutic massage adjuvant treatment measures. Five asthma outcome indicators were focused on: FEV1, FVC, PEF, PAQLQ, and FeNO. The ROB was low in the included studies. The NMA of two-by-two comparisons showed that all non-pharmacological adjunctive interventions were able to improve asthma symptoms better, with exercise training improving FEV1 (MD = 3.67, 95%CI [1.39, 5.95]), PEF (MD = 6.07, 95%CI [1.07, 11.07]), and PAQLQ (MD = 0.93, 95%CI [0.33, 1.52]) with statistical significance (p < 0.05).
conclusionFive non-pharmacological interventions for childhood asthma demonstrated consistent efficacy across all modalities in alleviating asthma symptoms. Psychological interventions emerged as the optimal adjunctive therapy for improving FEV1, while exercise training exhibited the most potent therapeutic effect on FVC. Furthermore, massage therapy demonstrated superior efficacy in enhancing PEF, PAQLQ scores, and FeNO levels.
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.