Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 10;47(9):381–396. doi: 10.14745/ccdr.v47i09a05

Table 4. Summary of evidence for asthma associated with RSV infection among within-study population comparisons.

Outcome Comparator 1 Comparator 2 FU Study design
(no. of studies);
Sample size
Absolute difference (95% CI) Relative risk
(95% CI)
Certainty of evidence Conclusion
Comparator 2 risk Absolute risk differencea
Asthma; physician-diagnosed
Not-at-risk population RSV infection in first year of life Infection with a respiratory pathogen other than RSV in first year of life 7 y PC31 (n=1);
329
12 per 100 15 more per 100
(4–35 more)
RR 2.33
(1.35, 4.05)
Adjusted for total number of respiratory episodes:
OR 1.26
(0.54, 2.91), p=0.59
Very lowb,c,d,e Very uncertain
For physician-diagnosed asthma at seven years of age among healthy infants with RSV vs. a different respiratory pathogen in the first year of life
Not-at-risk population RSV-H No RSV-H 28–31 y PC28 (n=1);
129
13 per 100 NS RR 1.82
(0.84, 3.94)
Very lowb,c,e Very uncertain
For physician-diagnosed asthma at 28–31 years of age among term infants with vs. without hospitalization for RSV at age <24 months
Asthma; self-reported
Not-at-risk population RSV-H No RSV-H 17–20 y;
28–31 y
PC27,28 (n=2);
203
15 per 100 19 more per 100
(0.1–60 more)
RR 2.28
(1.01, 5.12)
Lowb,e Small increase
For self-reported asthma in adulthood (17–31 years of age) among infants with vs. without hospitalization for RSV at age <24 months
Asthma medication (bronchodilator)
At-risk with RSV-H vs. at-risk without RSV-H Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
RSV-H
Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
No RSV-H
Across 2–6 y PC32 (n=1);
487
17 per 100 8 more per 100
(4–13 more)
RR 1.48
(1.23, 1.77)
Lowc,e Small increase
Parent-reported bronchodilator use from 2–6 years of age among infants born premature (32–35 wGA) with vs. without hospitalization for RSV at <12 months
Not-at-risk population RSV-H No RSV-H 28–31 y PC28 (n=1);
129
14 per 100 16 more per 100
(1–47 more)
RR 2.17
(1.08, 4.34)
Very lowb,c,e Very uncertain
For self-reported bronchodilator use in adulthood (28–31 years of age) among term infants with vs. without hospitalization for RSV at age <24 months
Asthma medication (inhaled CS)
At-risk with RSV-H vs. at-risk without RSV-H Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
RSV-H
Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
No RSV-H
Across 2–6 y PC32 (n=1);
487
16 per 100 10 more per 100
(2–22 more)
RR 1.65
(1.13, 2.40)
Lowc,e Small increase
Parent-reported ICS use from 2–6 years of age among infants born premature (32–35 wGA) with hospitalization for RSV at <12 months
Not-at-risk population RSV-H No RSV-H 28–31 y PC28 (n=1);
129
11 per 100 NS RR 1.56
(0.62, 3.89)
Very lowb,c,e Very uncertain
For self-reported ICS use in adulthood (28–31 years of age) among term infants with vs. without hospitalization for RSV at age <24 months
Asthma medication (oral CS)
At-risk with RSV-H vs. at-risk without RSV-H Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
RSV-H
Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
No RSV-H
Across 2–6 y PC32 (n=1);
487
11 per 100 8 more per 100
(0.6–19 more)
RR 1.71
(1.06, 2.74)
Lowc,e Small increase
Parent-reported oral CS use from 2–6 years of age among infants born premature (32–35 wGA) with vs. without hospitalization for RSV at <12 months
Asthma medication (leukotriene antagonist)
At-risk with RSV-H vs. at-risk without RSV-H Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
RSV-H
Prematurity: 32–35 wGA,
No RSV-H
Across 2–6 y PC32 (n=1);
487
6 per 100 10 more per 100
(3–22 more)
RR 2.52
(1.43, 4.42)
Lowc,e Increased
Parent-reported leukotriene antagonist use from 2–6 years of age among infants born premature (32–35 wGA) with vs. without hospitalization for RSV at <12 months

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CS, corticosteroid(s); FU, follow-up; ICS, inhaled corticosteroid(s); no., number; NS, not significant; OR, odds ratio; PC, prospective cohort; RR, risk ratio; RSV, respiratory syncytial virus; RSV-H, respiratory syncytial virus hospitalization; vs.: versus; wGA, weeks’ gestational age; y, year(s)

a Absolute risk reductions were calculated when findings were statistically significant; NS denotes when findings were not statistically significant

Certainty of evidence was assessed for each outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Starting at high for observational studies (for prognosis evidence) each outcome is rated as high, moderate, low or very low based on downgrading (if any) for one or more of the following domains:

b Study limitations, including selective outcome reporting

c Inconsistency

d Indirectness

e Imprecision

f Half decrement (-0.5) due to small concern for this domain