Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24607295›Full record

Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2014

Improving efficiency and reducing costs: Design of an adaptive, seamless, and enriched pragmatic efficacy trial of an online asthma management program.

Mei Lu, Dennis R Ownby, Edward Zoratti, Douglas Roblin, Dayna Johnson, Christine Cole Johnson, Christine L M Joseph

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Contemporary use of real-world data for clinical trial conduct in the United States: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Using e-technologies in clinical trials.Contemporary clinical trials · 2015
    Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mei LuDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA. Electronic address: mlu1@hfhs.org.
Dennis R OwnbyDepartment of Pediatrics, Georgia Regents University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Edward ZorattiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Allergy, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Douglas RoblinThe Center for Health Research/Southeast, Kaiser Permanente Georgia, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Dayna JohnsonDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Christine Cole JohnsonDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Christine L M JosephDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Henry Ford Hospital · USAugusta University · USKaiser Permanente · US

Funding

PRAGMATIC CLUSTER RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF AN ASTHMA INTERVENTION FOR URBAN TEENSR01HL114981 · NHLBI · HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM · PI JOSEPH, CHRISTINE LM, LU, MEI · 2012 to 2015
$2.5M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL114981NHLBI NIH HHS R01HL114981
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical trials are critical for medical decision-making, however, under the current paradigm, clinical trials are fraught with problems including low enrollment and high cost. Promising alternatives to increase trial efficiency and reduce costs include the use of (1) electronic initiatives that permit electronic remote data capture (EDC) for direct data collection at a site (2), electronic medical records (EMR) for patient identification and data collection, and (3) adaptive, enrichment designs with pragmatic approaches. We describe the design of a seamless, multi-site randomized Phase II/III trial to evaluate an asthma management intervention in urban adolescents with asthma. Patients are randomized, asked to access four online sessions of the intervention or control asthma management program, and are then followed for one year. The primary efficacy endpoint is self-reported asthma control as measured by the Asthma Control Test (ACT). Comparative effectiveness parametric approaches are utilized to conduct the trial in a real world setting with reduced costs. Escalated electronic initiatives are implemented for patient identification, assent, enrollment and tracking. Patient enrollment takes place during primary care visits. A centralized database with EDC is used for CRF data collection with integration of EMR data. This Phase II/III trial plans to have a total sample size of 500 patients with an interim look at the completion of Phase II (n=250), The interim analyses include an assessment of the intervention effect, marker(s) identification and the feasibility study of EMR data as the trial CRF data collection. Patient enrollment has begun and is ongoing.

Indexed as

Patient AcuityResearch DesignSelf ReportAdolescentAsthmaCost-Benefit AnalysisData CollectionElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultAdolescentsAsthma management interventionClinical trialsComparative effectiveness researchEnrichment designSeamless adaptive design

Identifiers

PMID24607295
PMCPMC4877682
OpenAlexW2080865115

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.