ArticleQuality in health care : QHC1999
Changing clinical practice: views about the management of adult asthma.
Article in Quality in health care : QHC, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From data to practice change - exploring new territory for atlases of clinical variation.Research in health services & regions · 2022Article
- Methods for evaluation of small scale quality improvement projects.Quality & safety in health care · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A case study of clinical practice in adult asthma is presented. The case is part of a larger project, funded by the North Thames NHS Executive Research and Development Programme, that sought to explore the part played by clinicians in the implementation of research and development into practice in two areas: adult asthma and glue ear in children. The first case of glue ear in children was reported in a previous issue of this journal (Quality in Health Care 1999;8:99-107). Background information from secondary sources on the condition, treatment, and organisation and location of care is followed by an account of the results of semistructured interviews with 159 clinicians. The findings are reported in two sections: clinical management and the organisation of care, and clinicians' accounts of what, why, and how they introduce changes into their practice. The way clinicians talk about their learning, their expressed views on acceptable practice, and their willingness to change were shown to be informed by construction of legitimate and sufficient evidence, respected colleagues, and accumulated individual experience. There was little open acknowledgment of the influence of organisational factors in influencing practice. To investigate whether relationships between task performance and organisational arrangements found in other sectors apply to UK health, more robust measures by which performance can be evaluated are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.