ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2004
Do the British Guidelines for Asthma Management facilitate concordance?
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2004. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A test of concordance between patient and psychiatrist valuations of multiple treatment goals for schizophrenia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2013Article
- Assessing asthma control in UK primary care: use of routinely collected prospective observational consultation data to determine appropriateness of a variety of control assessment models.BMC family practice · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAsthma is an example of a common, chronic illness in which clinicians are encouraged to promote concordance and adhere to guidelines. Some existing research suggests that these aims may be incompatible.
objectivesTo describe patient goals for life and for asthma management in order to inform concordance with people with asthma.
designA cross-sectional, qualitative survey. SETTING AND
participantsA purposive sample of 47 adults with asthma from Dundee, UK. The subjects were identified from general practice asthma registers and had a range of ages and asthma severity but no significant comorbidity.
methodsTape-recorded semi-structured interviews. The topic guide was based on the literature and had been piloted in a previous study.
resultsThe participants focussed on improving their lives, only aiming to improve their asthma as a means of improving their lives. Three aspects of asthma were reported to help or hinder improving life: the use of asthma medication, trigger avoidance and exercise. People integrated these three aspects of asthma in order to maximize life.
conclusionsThe study supports the more individualized goals of the recently revised British Guidelines for Asthma Management but highlights the need to develop this further in future revisions. It also provides an explanation for patients' acceptance of less than 'perfect' asthma control and it suggests that shared goals may be achieved in practice by considering the advantages and disadvantages of medication and allergen avoidance on everyday life rather than on asthma.
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.