Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12528584›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2002

A randomised controlled trial of clinics in secondary schools for adolescents with asthma.

Chris Salisbury, Caia Francis, Chris Rogers, Kate Parry, Huw Thomas, Stephanie Chadwick, Pat Turton

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Outcomes for patients with the same disease treated inside and outside of randomized trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Impact of Nurse-Led Asthma Intervention on Child Health Outcomes: A Scoping Review.The Journal of school nursing : the official publication of the National Association of School Nurses · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Participating in primary care research.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Article
  10. Breast cancer prevention.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Chris SalisburyDivision of Primary Health Care, University of Bristol, Cotham House, Cotham Hill, Bristol BS6 6JL. c.salisbury@bristol.ac.uk
Caia Francis
Chris Rogers
Kate Parry
Huw Thomas
Stephanie Chadwick
Pat Turton

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare a nurse-led clinic in schools versus care in general practice for adolescents with asthma. DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised controlled trial in four schools; parallel observational study in two schools.

settingSix comprehensive schools.

methodIn the randomised trial, pupils were invited to attend asthma review at a nurse-led clinic either in school, or in general practice. The parallel observational study compared pupils invited to practice care within and outside the randomised trial. Primary outcome measures were attendance for asthma review, symptom control, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes were knowledge, attitudes, inhaler technique, use of steroids, school absence, peak flow rate, preference for future care, health service utilisation, and costs.

resultsSchool clinic pupils were more likely to attend an asthma review than those randomised to practice care (90.8% versus 51.0% overall [P < 0.001, not consistent across schools]). No differences were observed in symptom control (P = 0.42) or quality of life (P = 0.63). Pupils attending school clinics had greater knowledge of asthma (difference = +0.38, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.56), more positive attitudes (difference = +0.21, 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.36), and better inhaler technique (P < 0.001, not consistent across all schools). No differences were observed in school absence or peak flow rate. A majority (63%) of those who had received care at school preferred this model in future. Median costs of providing care at school and at the practice were 32.10 Pounds and 19.80 Pounds, respectively. No differences were observed between the groups in the observational comparison on any outcome.

conclusionsThe schools asthma clinic increased uptake of asthma reviews. There were improvements in various process measures, but not in clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

AbsenteeismAdministration, InhalationAdolescentAlgorithmsAsthmaAttitude to HealthFamily PracticeFemaleHumansMalePatient Acceptance of Health CareSchool Health Services

Identifiers

PMID12528584
PMCPMC1314468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.