Trial reportThe European journal of general practice2017
Designing and evaluating a health education session on respiratory infections addressed to caregivers of children under three years of age attending day-care centres in Porto, Portugal: A community-based intervention.
Trial report in The European journal of general practice, 2017. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to reduce inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections: summary and update of a systematic review.The Journal of international medical research · 2018Pooled it
- Effectiveness of a Novel Smartphone Health Education Intervention in Enhancing Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices for the Prevention of Respiratory Tract Infections Among Private Hajj Pilgrims From Malaysia.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Reducing antimicrobial resistance through population empowerment.The European journal of general practice · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute respiratory infections (ARI) are common in children, increasing the pressure on clinicians to prescribe antibiotics and affecting public health Objectives: This study aimed to design a health education session (HES) for caregivers of children, and to evaluate its effects on caregivers' needs, as well as on their knowledge and attitudes concerning ARI.
methodsA generalized model of developing, implementing and evaluating a community-based intervention was followed, including caregivers of children under three years of age. Caregivers were randomly distributed into an intervention group (IG) (n = 41) and a control group (CG) (n = 51) and the HES was administered to the IG. The caregivers' needs as well as knowledge of and attitudes to ARI were evaluated in both groups, before (M0) and two months after the HES (M1).
resultsAt M0 the caregivers from both groups had 'some or great need' about all HES domains; at M1 the caregivers in the IG expressed 'no or low need', whereas the CG maintained 'some or great need' about all HES domains (0.011 ≤ P ≤ .047). Concerning caregivers' knowledge of and attitudes to ARI, at M1 there was a higher frequency of caregivers with right answers in the IG than in the CG (IG =7.5 ± 1 versus CG =6.0 ± 2; P = .000). Those differences occurred in domain (e) nasal clearance techniques, revealing a higher percentage of caregivers who used correctly nasal irrigation (P = .000), nasal aspirators (0.000 ≤P ≤ .001) and nebulization (P = .000) in IG.
conclusionThe HES met the caregivers' needs regarding ARI and increased their knowledge and attitudes towards ARI, especially regarding nasal clearance techniques.
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.