Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24550161›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2014

Digital asthma self-management interventions: a systematic review.

Deborah Morrison, Sally Wyke, Karolina Agur, Euan J Cameron, Robert I Docking, Alison M Mackenzie, Alex McConnachie, Vandana Raghuvir, Neil C Thomson, Frances S Mair

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 106 papers, 17 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
106citing papers in PubMed, 17 pooled it
35.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT03511482 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

An Open Feasibility Study to Investigate the Impact of A Digitally Delivered Asthma Service for Patients in Primary Care (IDEAL-001: Integrated Digitally EnhAnced Care for Long-term Conditions-001

TypeinterventionalSponsormy mhealth LtdRan2019 to 2021Enrolled0ConditionsAsthmaArmsmyAsthma Application, Lloyds Pharmacy Online Doctor
NCT04744272 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Randomised Controlled Feasibility Study to Explore the Efficacy of Digital Self-management Within Secondary Care in an Asthmatic Population

TypeinterventionalSponsormy mhealth LtdRan2022 to 2023Enrolled0ConditionsAsthmaArmsmyAsthma
NCT06116292 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Impact of the Implementation of a Telemedicine Program on Patients Diagnosed with Asthma

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital Universitari de BellvitgeRan2024 to 2026Enrolled108ConditionsAsthma, Telemedicine, Adherence, Treatment, Quality of LifeArmsThe mobile application ESTOI for Asthmatic patients
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

106 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 191 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Digital Patient Experience: Umbrella Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Systematic Review of Digital Interventions for Pediatric Asthma Management.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2020
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Smartphone Applications for Encouraging Asthma Self-Management in Adolescents: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

46 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Deborah MorrisonGeneral Practice & Primary Care, Institute of Health & Wellbeing, College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Sally Wyke
Karolina Agur
Euan J Cameron
Robert I Docking
Alison M Mackenzie
Alex McConnachie
Vandana Raghuvir
Neil C Thomson
Frances S Mair
University of Glasgow · GBForth Valley Royal Hospital · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany people with asthma tolerate symptoms and lifestyle limitations unnecessarily by not utilizing proven therapies. Better support for self-management is known to improve asthma control, and increasingly the Internet and other digital media are being used to deliver that support.

objectiveOur goal was to summarize current knowledge, evidenced through existing systematic reviews, of the effectiveness and implementation of digital self-management support for adults and children with asthma and to examine what features help or hinder the use of these programs.

methodsA comprehensive search strategy combined 3 facets of search terms: (1) online technology, (2) asthma, and (3) self-management/behavior change/patient experience. We undertook searches of 14 databases, and reference and citation searching. We included qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews about online or computerized interventions facilitating self-management. Title, abstract, full paper screening, and quality appraisal were performed by two researchers independently. Data extraction was undertaken using standardized forms.

resultsA total of 3810 unique papers were identified. Twenty-nine systematic reviews met inclusion criteria: the majority were from the United States (n=12), the rest from United Kingdom (n=6), Canada (n=3), Portugal (n=2), and Australia, France, Spain, Norway, Taiwan, and Greece (1 each). Only 10 systematic reviews fulfilled pre-determined quality standards, describing 19 clinical trials. Interventions were heterogeneous: duration of interventions ranging from single use, to 24-hour access for 12 months, and incorporating varying degrees of health professional involvement. Dropout rates ranged from 5-23%. Four RCTs were aimed at adults (overall range 3-65 years). Participants were inadequately described: socioeconomic status 0/19, ethnicity 6/19, and gender 15/19. No qualitative systematic reviews were included. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to heterogeneity and inadequate information provision within reviews. There was no evidence of harm from digital interventions. All RCTs that examined knowledge (n=2) and activity limitation (n=2) showed improvement in the intervention group. Digital interventions improved markers of self care (5/6), quality of life (4/7), and medication use (2/3). Effects on symptoms (6/12) and school absences (2/4) were equivocal, with no evidence of overall benefits on lung function (2/6), or health service use (2/15). No specific data on economic analyses were provided. Intervention descriptions were generally brief making it impossible to identify which specific "ingredients" of interventions contribute most to improving outcomes.

conclusionsDigital self-management interventions show promise, with evidence of beneficial effects on some outcomes. There is no evidence about utility in those over 65 years and no information about socioeconomic status of participants, making understanding the "reach" of such interventions difficult. Digital interventions are poorly described within reviews, with insufficient information about barriers and facilitators to their uptake and utilization. To address these gaps, a detailed quantitative systematic review of digital asthma interventions and an examination of the primary qualitative literature are warranted, as well as greater emphasis on economic analysis within trials.

Indexed as

Computer-Assisted InstructionSelf CareTelemedicineAdolescentAdultAsthmaChildFemaleHumansInternetMaleOnline SystemsPatient Education as TopicUnited StatesasthmaeHealthInternetpatient educationself-managementsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID24550161
PMCPMC3958674
OpenAlexW2079386922

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.