Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21730079›Full record

Trial reportClinical trials (London, England)2011

Redesigning a large school-based clinical trial in response to changes in community practice.

Lynn B Gerald, Joe K Gerald, Leslie A McClure, Kathy Harrington, Sue Erwin, William C Bailey

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical trials (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. 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

6 authors.

Lynn B GeraldMel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, and the Arizona Respiratory Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA. lgerald@email.arizona.edu
Joe K Gerald
Leslie A McClure
Kathy Harrington
Sue Erwin
William C Bailey

Funding

The Effect of a School Based Hand Sanitizer Program on AsthmaR01HL086972 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI BAILEY, WILLIAM C · 2007 to 2011
$3.0M
NHLBI NIH HHS 1 R01HL086972NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL086972
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAsthma exacerbations are seasonal with the greatest risk in elementary-age students occurring shortly after returning to school following summer break. Recent research suggests that this seasonality in children is primarily related to viral respiratory tract infections. Regular hand washing is the most effective method to prevent the spread of viral respiratory infections; unfortunately, achieving hand washing recommendations in schools is difficult. Therefore, we designed a study to evaluate the effect of hand sanitizer use in elementary schools on exacerbations among children with asthma. PURPOSE: To describe the process of redesigning the trial in response to changes in the safety profile of the hand sanitizer as well as changes in hand hygiene practice in the schools.

methodsThe original trial was a randomized, longitudinal, subject-blinded, placebo-controlled, community-based crossover trial. The primary aim was to evaluate the incremental effectiveness of hand sanitizer use in addition to usual hand hygiene practices to decrease asthma exacerbations in elementary-age children. Three events occurred that required major modifications to the original study protocol: (1) safety concerns arose regarding the hand sanitizer's active ingredient; (2) no substitute placebo hand sanitizer was available; and (3) community preferences changed regarding hand hygiene practices in the schools.

resultsThe revised protocol is a randomized, longitudinal, community-based crossover trial. The primary aim is to evaluate the incremental effectiveness of a two-step hand hygiene process (hand hygiene education plus institutionally provided alcohol-based hand sanitizer) versus usual care to decrease asthma exacerbations. Enrollment was completed in May 2009 with 527 students from 30 schools. The intervention began in August 2009 and will continue through May 2011. Study results should be available at the end of 2011. LIMITATIONS: The changed design does not allow us to directly measure the effectiveness of hand sanitizer use as a supplement to traditional hand washing practices.

conclusionsThe need to balance a rigorous study design with one that is acceptable to the community requires investigators to be actively involved with community collaborators and able to adapt study protocols to fit changing community practices.

Indexed as

Research DesignSchoolsAlabamaChildCross-Over StudiesHand DisinfectionHumansInterviews as TopicLongitudinal StudiesRespiratory Tract InfectionsStatus Asthmaticus

Identifiers

PMID21730079
PMCPMC3145214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.