Results Although highlighting a general lack of high- quality real-life effectiveness observational research on these clinical ly important topics , the analysis provided insights into how identified observational studies might inform asthma guidelines developers and clinicians .
Overall , RELEVANT appeared reliable and easy to use by expert review ers .
Conclusions Using such quality appraisal tools is m and atory to assess whether specific observational real-life effectiveness studies can be used to inform guideline development and /or decision-making in clinical practice
Abstract Introduction A Task Force was commissioned jointly by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology ( EAACI ) and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group ( REG ) to develop a  quality assessment tool for real-life observational research to identify high- quality real-life asthma studies that could be considered within future guideline development .
External validity of randomised controlled trials in asthma: to whom do the results of the trials apply?
Background : Asthma is a heterogeneous disease with a wide range of clinical phenotypes , not all of which may be encompassed in the subjects included in r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) . This makes it difficult for clinicians to know to what extent the evidence derived from RCTs applies to a given patient . Aim : To calculate the proportion of  individuals with asthma who would have been eligible for the major asthma RCTs from the data of a r and om community survey of respiratory health . Methods : A postal survey was sent to 3500 r and omly selected individuals aged 25–75 years . Respondents were invited to complete a detailed respiratory question naire and pulmonary function testing . Participants with current asthma were assessed against the eligibility criteria of the 17 major asthma RCTs cited in the Global Initiative for Asthma ( GINA ) guidelines . Findings : A total of 749 participants completed the full survey , of whom 179 had current asthma . A median 4 % of participants with current asthma ( range 0–36 % ) met the eligibility criteria for the included RCTs . A median 6 % ( range 0–43 % ) of participants with current asthma on treatment met the eligibility criteria . Interpretation : This study shows that the major asthma RCTs on which the GINA guidelines are based may have limited external validity as they have been performed on highly selected patient population s. Most of the participants with current asthma on treatment in the community would not have been eligible for these RCTs
Results Although highlighting a general lack of high- quality real-life effectiveness observational research on these clinical ly important topics , the analysis provided insights into how identified observational studies might inform asthma guidelines developers and clinicians .
Overall , RELEVANT appeared reliable and easy to use by expert review ers .
Conclusions Using such quality appraisal tools is m and atory to assess whether specific observational real-life effectiveness studies can be used to inform guideline development and /or decision-making in clinical practice
Abstract Introduction A Task Force was commissioned jointly by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology ( EAACI ) and the Respiratory Effectiveness Group ( REG ) to develop a  quality assessment tool for real-life observational research to identify high- quality real-life asthma studies that could be considered within future guideline development .