A pragmatist approach to the problem of knowledge in health psychology

The multiplicity of forms of health-related knowledge, including biomedical knowledge, lay knowledge and critical constructionist knowledge, raises challenges for health researchers. On one hand, there is a demand for a pluralist acceptance of the variety of health-related knowledge. On the other, the need to improve health calls for action, and thus for choices between opposing forms of knowledge. The present article proposes a pragmatist approach to this epistemological problem. According to pragmatism, knowledge is a tool for action and as such it should be evaluated according to whether it serves our desired interests. We identify implications for research methodology and the choice of research goals

Research Priorities in Pediatric Asthma: Results of a Global Survey of Multiple Stakeholder Groups by the Pediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank

Background: Pediatric asthma remains a public health challenge with enormous impact worldwide. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize unmet clinical needs in pediatric asthma, which could be used to guide future research and policy activities. Methods: We first identified unmet needs through an open-question survey administered to international experts in pediatric asthma who were members of the Pediatric Asthma in Real Life Think Tank. Prioritization of topics was then achieved through a second, extensive survey with global reach, of multiple stakeholders (leading experts, researchers, clinicians, patients, policy makers, and the pharmaceutical industry). Differences across responder groups were compared. Results: A total of 57 unmet clinical need topics identified by international experts were prioritized by 412 participants from 5 continents and 60 countries. Prevention of disease progression and prediction of future risk, including persistence into adulthood, emerged as the most urgent research questions. Stratified care, based on biomarkers, clinical phenotypes, the children's age, and demographics were also highly rated. The identification of minimum diagnostic criteria in different age groups, cultural perceptions of asthma, and best treatment by age group were priorities for responders from low-middle-income countries. There was good agreement across different stakeholder groups in all domains with some notable exceptions that highlight the importance of involving the whole range of stakeholders in formulation of recommendations. Conclusions: Different stakeholders agree in the majority of research and strategic (eg, prevention, personalized approach) priorities for pediatric asthma. Stakeholder diversity is crucial for highlighting divergent issues that future guidelines should consider. © 2020 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunolog

Childhood asthma outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the PeARL multi-national cohort

Background: The interplay between COVID-19 pandemic and asthma in children is still unclear. We evaluated the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on childhood asthma outcomes. Methods: The PeARL multinational cohort included 1,054 children with asthma and 505 non-asthmatic children aged between 4 and 18 years from 25 pediatric departments, from 15 countries globally. We compared the frequency of acute respiratory and febrile presentations during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between groups and with data available from the previous year. In children with asthma, we also compared current and historical disease control. Results: During the pandemic, children with asthma experienced fewer upper respiratory tract infections, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits, hospital admissions, asthma attacks, and hospitalizations due to asthma, in comparison with the preceding year. Sixty-six percent of asthmatic children had improved asthma control while in 33% the improvement exceeded the minimal clinically important difference. Pre-bronchodilatation FEV1 and peak expiratory flow rate were improved during the pandemic. When compared to non-asthmatic controls, children with asthma were not at increased risk of LRTIs, episodes of pyrexia, emergency visits, or hospitalizations during the pandemic. However, an increased risk of URTIs emerged. Conclusion: Childhood asthma outcomes, including control, were improved during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, probably because of reduced exposure to asthma triggers and increased treatment adherence. The decreased frequency of acute episodes does not support the notion that childhood asthma may be a risk factor for COVID-19. Furthermore, the potential for improving childhood asthma outcomes through environmental control becomes apparent. © 2021 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd