ReviewDrugs2001
Changing approaches to asthma management in Australia: effects on asthma morbidity.
Review in Drugs, 2001. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- The impact of guidelines on long-term asthma care: a study of hospitalised patients in Malta.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Asthma is an important public health issue in Australia and is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality in the community. Recognition of the impact of asthma on the health of Australians, and the apparent failure of new medications to reduce mortality and hospital admission rates resulted in a major review by the stakeholders in asthma care. This led to new approaches to asthma management based on strategic use of asthma medications and the development of the Asthma Management Plan (AMP). The AMP drew together current understanding of asthma to develop a simple stepwise approach to management that could be readily applied in patient management. The National Asthma Campaign (NAC), a coalition of the major stakeholders in asthma care, was launched in 1990 to lead the dissemination of the AMP. In association with other organisations interested in asthma care in Australia, the NAC has developed the AMP, and co-ordinated a decade of education and advocacy about asthma that targeted doctors, health professionals and the general public. These activities have been successful in raising awareness about asthma in the community. However, recent research, while demonstrating the continued uptake of written asthma action plans for asthma and decrease in use of inhaled bronchodilator medications, reported a decrease in use of preventive therapy by people with asthma. These activities have had a sustained impact on asthma-related health outcomes with mortality at the lowest level since 1960 and a decline in hospital readmission rates. This is useful information because there is sound evidence that the prevalence and possibly severity of asthma in children has increased. However, review of management in primary care and among people who present to emergency services with acute asthma suggest that many people continue to manage their asthma poorly. Continued education is needed to build on the progress that has been made. There are opportunities to do this through efforts to integrate general practitioners into the wider health system through the formation of Divisions of General Practice. Recognition of asthma as a health priority area at a national level will help to enhance and maintain awareness of the public health importance of asthma and facilitate the further development of the initiatives begun during the last decade or more.
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.