The 2017 guideline committees made the following recommendations for research on diagnosing and monitoring asthma and for managing chronic asthma (marked ). The committee's full set of research recommendations is detailed in the 2017 full guideline on asthma: diagnosis and monitoring and the 2017 full guideline on chronic asthma management.
As part of the 2020 update, the guideline committee made 1 new research recommendation on managing asthma within a self-management programme for children and young people (marked ).
What is the acceptability and diagnostic accuracy of objective tests that could be used to comprise a diagnostic pathway for asthma in children and young people aged 5 to 16 (for example, exercise challenge, direct bronchial challenge with histamine or methacholine, indirect bronchial challenge with mannitol and peripheral blood eosinophil count)? 
What is the clinical and cost effectiveness of using an indirect bronchial challenge test with mannitol to diagnose asthma in adults (aged 17 and over)? 
What is the clinical and cost effectiveness of using electronic alert systems designed to monitor and improve adherence with regular inhaled maintenance therapy in people with asthma? 
What is the current frequency and the current method being used to check the inhaler technique of people with asthma? What is the optimal frequency and the best method of checking inhaler technique to improve clinical outcomes for people with asthma? 
What is the long-term (more than 12 months) clinical and cost effectiveness of using tele-healthcare as a means to monitor asthma control in adults, young people and children? Methods of tele-healthcare can include telephone interview (with healthcare professional involvement) and internet or smartphone-based monitoring support (no healthcare professional involvement). 
1 Increasing the dose of ICS within a personalised self-management programme for children and young people
For children and young people with asthma that is managed in primary care, is there an advantage to increasing the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) dose when asthma control has deteriorated compared with using the usual dose in a self-management programme? 
For a short explanation of why the committee made the recommendation for research, see the rationale on increasing the dose of ICS within a personalised self-management programme for children and young people.
Full details of the research recommendation are in evidence review A: increasing ICS treatment within supported self-management for children and young people.
In adults, young people and children with asthma who have not been treated previously, is it more clinically and cost effective to start treatment with a reliever alone (a short-acting beta2 agonist [SABA]) or with a reliever (a SABA) and maintenance therapy (such as ICS)? Are there specific prognostic features that indicate that one of these treatment options may be more appropriate for some groups? 
Is maintenance therapy more effective with a paediatric low dose of ICS plus a leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) or with a paediatric low dose of ICS plus a long-acting beta2 agonist (LABA) in the treatment of asthma in children and young people (under 16) who have uncontrolled asthma on a paediatric low dose of ICS alone? 
4 Additional maintenance therapy for asthma uncontrolled on a moderate dose of ICS plus LABA with or without LTRA
What is the clinical and cost effectiveness of offering additional maintenance therapy to adults, young people and children with asthma that is uncontrolled on a moderate dose of ICS plus LABA with or without LTRA? 
In adults, young people and children with well-controlled asthma, what are the objective measurements and prognostic factors that indicate that a decrease in regular maintenance treatment is appropriate?