Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2015
E-health and consultation rates for respiratory illnesses in infants: a randomised clinical trial in primary care.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital Interventions to Improve Health Literacy Among Parents of Children Aged 0 to 12 Years With a Health Condition: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- A Study of eHealth from the Perspective of Social Sciences.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Effect of an evidence-based website on healthcare usage: an interrupted time-series study.BMJ open · 2016Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is assumed that clear and complete information on the internet can reduce healthcare consumption.
aimWe assessed in a randomised clinical trial whether a personalised online parent information program on infant respiratory symptoms can reduce primary care utilisation. DESIGN AND
settingRandomised clinical trial in primary healthcare centres in a new residential area in the Netherlands.
methodA web-based program (WHISTLER-online) was developed for parents that offered general information on childhood respiratory disease and personalised risk assessments. Parents of infants who enrolled from June 2009 to June 2012 in WHISTLER, an ongoing population-based birth cohort, were randomly allocated to 'WHISTLER-online' or 'usual care'. Information about, first, consultations and, second, associated prescriptions for respiratory symptoms during the first year of life was collected from the electronic patient files.
resultsA total of 323 infants were randomly assigned to WHISTLER-online and 322 to usual care, and 314 and 305, respectively, were analysed. Of the parents, 70% used WHISTLER-online, and 99% of them judged it to be clear and useful information. There were differences neither in consultation rates for respiratory symptoms (incidence rate ratio 0.96 [95% CI = 0.85 to 1.09, P = 0.532]) nor in associated drug prescriptions.
conclusionAlthough parents greatly appreciate the provided facilities, a personalised e-support program on respiratory illnesses in infants does not substantially reduce healthcare utilisation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.