Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23614791›Full record

SynthesisThe Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma2013

Cost-consequence analysis of multimodal interventions with environmental components for pediatric asthma in the state of Maryland.

Mandeep S Jassal, Gregory B Diette, David W Dowdy

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Asthma and Allergies in the School Environment.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2019
    Review
  3. Recent advances in environmental controls outside the home setting.Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology · 2016
    Review
  4. Review
  5. School Environmental Intervention Programs.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
    Review
  6. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mandeep S JassalDepartment of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. mjassal1@jhmi.edu
Gregory B Diette
David W Dowdy
Johns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Multidisciplinary Training Program in Pediatric PulmonaryT32HL072748 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Joseph Michael Collaco · 2003 to 2026
$6.1M
Mentoring and Patient Oriented Research in AsthmaK24ES021098 · NIEHS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DIETTE, GREGORY B · 2012 to 2016
$927k
Improving Physician Adherence to Asthma GuidelinesK23HL004266 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DIETTE, GREGORY B · 2001 to 2005
$792k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL004266NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL072748NIEHS NIH HHS K24 ES021098
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApplied environmental strategies for asthma control are often expensive, but may save longer-term healthcare costs. Whether these savings outweigh additional costs of implementing these strategies is uncertain.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review to estimate the expenditures and savings of environmental interventions for asthma in the state of Maryland. Direct costs included hospitalizations, emergency room, and clinic visits. Indirect expenditures included costs of lost work productivity and travel incurred during the usage of healthcare services. We used decision analysis, assuming a hypothetical cohort of the approximated 49,290 pediatric individuals in Maryland with persistent asthma, to compare costs and benefits of environmental asthma interventions against the standard of care (no intervention) from the societal perspective.

resultsThree interventions among nine articles met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review: 1) environmental education using medical professionals; 2) education using non-medical personnel; and 3) multi-component strategy involving education with non-medical personnel, allergen-impermeable covers, and pest management. All interventions were found to be cost-saving relative to the standard of care. Home environmental education using non-medical professionals yielded the highest net savings of $14.1 million (95% simulation interval (SI): $-.283 million, $19.4 million), while the multi-component intervention resulted in the lowest net savings of $8.1 million (95% SI: $-4.9 million, $15.9 million). All strategies were most sensitive to the baseline number of hospitalizations in those not receiving targeted interventions for asthma.

conclusionsLimited environmental reduction strategies for asthma are likely to be cost-saving to the healthcare system in Maryland and should be considered for broader scale-up in other economically similar settings.

Indexed as

AsthmaChildCosts and Cost AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesEnvironmentEnvironmental HealthHumansMaryland

Identifiers

PMID23614791
PMCPMC4936778
OpenAlexW2169942630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.