Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Childhood respiratory cohort studies: do they generate useful outcomes?

S. Turner
Breathe 2012 8: 194-204; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.004011
S. Turner
Child Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: s.w.turner@abdn.ac.uk
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    A map of the world showing the location of many cohort studies (including intervention studies). ALSPAC: Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children; BAMSE: Children, Allergy, Milieu, Stockholm, Epidemiological survey; CAPPS: Canadian Asthma Primary Prevention Study; CAPS: Childhood Asthma Prevention Study; COPSAC: Copenhagen Prospective Study on Asthma in Childhood; KOALA: Child, Parent and Health; Lifestyle and Genetic Constitution; MAAS: Manchester Asthma and Allergy Study; MAS: German Multicentre Asthma Study; NZACS: New Zealand Asthma and Allergy Cohort Study; PIAMA: Prevention and Incidence of Mite Allergy; PIAF: Perth Infant Asthma Follow-up; PREVASC: Prevention of Asthma in Children; PROBIT: Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial; SAGE: Study of Asthma Genes and the Environment; SIDRIA: Italian Studies of Respiratory Disorders in Childhood and the Environment.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Table 1 Differences between the designs of asthma cohort studies. In one study [11] the majority of study participants were from an unselected population but additionally, an intervention given to high risk infants was nested within the study design
    CategoryExamples
    Age at first dataPre conception cohorts [4], Birth cohorts [1], Childhood cohorts [12]
    Inclusion criteriaUnselected cohorts [5, 11, 13–16], inclusion of “high risk infants” (e.g. at least one parent with asthma) [11, 17], inclusion of only patients with asthma [12]
    Respiratory specific?Respiratory and non-respiratory outcomes measured [1, 2], Respiratory/allergy specific [3, 4]
    ExposureAllergen exposure [11], Ambient air quality [18], Breast feeding [19], Maternal diet [20], Maternal illness during pregnancy [21], Smoking [22]
  • Table 2 Strengths and weaknesses of asthma cohort studies
    StrengthsLimitations
    Prospective data collection (no recall bias)Can be difficult to change study protocol, e.g. retrospectively add data, change outcome
    Hypothesis drivenStill does not prove causation
    Essential for intervention studiesRecruitment of representative population
    Longitudinal analysis can reduce sample sizeDrop out
    Analysis can minimise effect of drop outOften only considers one exposure
    Able to consider different exposures at different timesCost
    Follow up for >10 years often necessary
    Lack of gold standard outcome
  • Table 3 Results from systematic reviews relating relative risk for asthma to factors. This list is not intended to be exhaustive but serves to illustrate that each factor has a relatively modest association in isolation. What is unknown is whether relative risks are additive or multiplicative when more than one factor is present for an individual
    Risk factor for developing childhood asthmaRelative risk [95% CI]Comment
    Either parent smoke [25]1.37 [1.15–1.64]
    Maternal asthma [26]3.04 [2.59–3.56]
    Paternal asthma [26]2.44 [2.14–2.79]
    Atopy [27]1.5 to 4.8
    Antenatal paracetamol exposure [28]1.28 [1.16–41]
    Dog exposure [29]1.14 [1.01–1.29]1.39 [1.00, 1.95] for any furry pet
    Cat exposure [29]0.72 [0.55–0.93]
    Breast feeding [19]0.70 [0.60–0.81]Lower in atopic families (OR 0.52)
    Visible mould [30]1.49 [1.28–1.72]Mould derived compounds may reduce risk
    High maternal vitamin D during pregnancy [20]0.56 [0.42–0.73]Wheezing outcomes not asthma
    High maternal vitamin E during pregnancy [20]0.68 [0.52–0.88]Wheezing outcomes not asthma
    Mediterranean diet during pregnancy [20]0.22 [0.08–0.58]Wheezing outcomes not asthma
  • Table 4 Summarising relative weight placed on measured variables in children aged 3 years for asthma at 11–13 years (7–8 years for PIAMA)
    Tucson [44]Isle of Wight [47]Leicester#[48]MAS¶ [45]PIAMA [49]
    Early recurrent wheeze++++++1.83.9
    Parental asthma/atopy+++2.38.31.9
    Eczema+++3.22.1
    Early IgE sensitisation++5.74.7
    Rhinitis++0.41.6
    Wheeze without URTI++2.9
    Male gender2.81.8
    Recurrent chest infection2.01.8
    • Ig: immunoglobulin. #: study also validated the Tucson Asthma Predictive Index (API) but concluded that early recurrent wheeze (i.e. at least three episodes by three years of age) was equivalent in precision to the API; ¶: study also described interactions between variables, odds ratios (OR) presented are for those with early recurrent wheeze. +++: greater weight; ++: intermediate weight.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 8 Issue 3 Table of Contents
Breathe: 8 (3)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Childhood respiratory cohort studies: do they generate useful outcomes?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Childhood respiratory cohort studies: do they generate useful outcomes?
S. Turner
Breathe Mar 2012, 8 (3) 194-204; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.004011

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Childhood respiratory cohort studies: do they generate useful outcomes?
S. Turner
Breathe Mar 2012, 8 (3) 194-204; DOI: 10.1183/20734735.004011
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Educational questions
    • Suggested answers
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Asthma and allergy
  • Epidemiology, occupational and environmental lung disease
  • Genetics
  • Respiratory clinical practice
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • A clinicians’ review of the respiratory microbiome
  • Improving the quality of tracheostomy care
  • e-Learning for the medical team
Show more Review

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About Breathe

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Intructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN: 1810-6838
Online ISSN: 2073-4735

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society