ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2006
Asthma control and management in the community: indices in 1997 compared with indices in 2002.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Calgary COPD & Asthma Program: The role of the respiratory therapy profession in primary care.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2018Article
- Socioeconomic factors and asthma control in children.Pediatric pulmonology · 2008Article
- Implementing practice guidelines: a workshop on guidelines dissemination and implementation with a focus on asthma and COPD.Canadian respiratory journal · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether there was any change in indices of asthma control in population-based samples of patients with asthma between 1997 and 2002.
designWe examined asthma control and treatment in the community using two cross-sectional studies carried out 5 years apart in 1997 and 2002. Pharmacists handed out the questionnaires to patients with asthma; patients completed the questionnaires themselves.
settingCommunity pharmacies in Alberta.
participantsPatients with physician-confirmed asthma attending pharmacies to fill prescriptions for asthma medications.
main outcome measureAsthma control.
resultsIn 1997 and 2002, 301 and 340 completed questionnaires were received, respectively. Mean age of respondents was 42 and 39 years and the female-to-male ratio was 1.3:1 and 1.4:1, respectively. Overall asthma control was achieved by 27% (1997) and 31% (2002) of subjects, a non-significant change. Regular inhaled corticosteroid use was reported by 63% (1997) and 65% (2002) of subjects; mean daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids reported decreased from 920 mug in 1997 to 765 mug in 2002 (P < .02), which might reflect adoption of the newer guideline recommendation for lower-dose inhaled corticosteroids in combination therapy rather than a decrease in severity of asthma. Fewer respondents reported being hospitalized for asthma in 2002 (P = .02). Self-management plans were used by 7% and 5% of subjects in 1997 and 2002, respectively.
conclusionIn general, asthma control and use of inhaled corticosteroids was similar in 1997 and 2002. There was no evidence that patient education on asthma had increased. Asthma control was poor in 1997 and had not improved by 2002.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17273483PMC1780155What 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.