The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Serevent nationwide surveillance study: comparison of salmeterol with salbutamol in asthmatic patients who require regular bronchodilator treatment.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE--To compare safety of salmeterol and salbutamol in treating asthma. DESIGN--Double blind, randomised clinical trial in parallel groups over 16 weeks. SETTING--General practices throughout the United Kingdom. SUBJECTS--25,180 patients with asthma considered to require regular treatment with bronchodilators who were recruited by their general practitioner (n = 3516). INTERVENTIONS--Salmeterol (Serevent) (50 micrograms twice daily) or salbutamol (200 micrograms four times a day) randomised in the ratio of two patients taking salmeterol to one taking salbutamol. All other drugs including prophylaxis against asthma were continued throughout the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--All serious events and reasons for withdrawals (medical and non-medical) whether or not they were considered to be related to the drugs. RESULTS--Fewer medical withdrawals due to asthma occurred in patients taking salmeterol than in those taking salbutamol (2.91% v 3.79%; chi 2 = 13.6, p = 0.0002). Mortality and admissions to hospital were as expected. There was a small but non-significant excess mortality in the group taking salmeterol and a significant excess of asthma events including deaths in patients with severe asthma on entry. Use of more than two canisters of bronchodilator a month was particularly associated with the occurrence of an adverse asthma event. CONCLUSIONS--Treatment over 16 weeks with either salmeterol or salbutamol was not associated with an incidence of deaths related to asthma in excess of that predicted. Overall control of asthma was better in patients allocated to salmeterol. Serious adverse events occurred in patients most at risk on entry and were probably due to the disease rather than treatment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Evans, S. J. W., Gøtzsche, P. C., O'Neill, R. T., Altman, D. G., Schulz, K., Moher, D., & for the CONSORT Group* (2004) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-141-10-200411160-00009 · Cited by 1,593
The Salmeterol Multicenter Asthma Research Trial
Nelson, H. S., Weiss, S. T., Bleecker, E. R., Yancey, S. W., & Dorinsky, P. M. (2006) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.129.1.15 · Cited by 1,114
Hunt, H., Pollock, A., Campbell, P., Estcourt, L., & Brunton, G. (2018) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-018-0695-8 · Cited by 314
Ortega, V. E., & Meyers, D. A. (2014) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2013.10.040 · Cited by 237
Prolonged effect of inhaled salmeterol against exercise-induced bronchospasm
Kemp, J. P., Dockhorn, R. J., Busse, W. W., Bleecker, E. R., & Van As, A. (1994) · American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.150.6.7952623 · Cited by 85
Metadata
- Authors
- Castle, W., Fuller, R., Hall, J., & Palmer, J.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1993-04-17
- Volume
- 306
- Issue
- 6884
- Pages
- 1034-1037
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2087666617
- Cited by
- 483
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Serevent nationwide surveillance study: comparison of salmeterol with salbutamol in asthmatic patients who require regular bronchodilator treatment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.306.6884.1034
- The paper
- Castle, W., Fuller, R., Hall, J., & Palmer, J. (1993). Serevent nationwide surveillance study: comparison of salmeterol with salbutamol in asthmatic patients who require regular bronchodilator treatment. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.306.6884.1034
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.