Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29133798›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2017

Motivational interviewing and urine cotinine feedback to stop passive smoke exposure in children predisposed to asthma: a randomised controlled trial.

Sasha G Hutchinson, Gerard van Breukelen, Constant P van Schayck, Brigitte Essers, S Katharine Hammond, Jean W M Muris, Frans J M Feron, Edward Dompeling

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sasha G HutchinsonDepartment of Paediatric Pulmonology, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+)/CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. sasha.hutchinson@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Gerard van BreukelenDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, MUMC+/CAPHRI, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Constant P van SchayckDepartment of Family Medicine, MUMC+/CAPHRI, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Brigitte EssersDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, MUMC+, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
S Katharine HammondSchool of Public Health, University of California, Mail/140 Warren, Berkeley, CA, 94720-7360, USA.
Jean W M MurisDepartment of Family Medicine, MUMC+/CAPHRI, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Frans J M FeronDepartment of Social Medicine, MUMC+/CAPHRI, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Edward DompelingDepartment of Paediatric Pulmonology, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+)/CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLUniversity Medical Center · USUniversity of California, Berkeley · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We tested the effectiveness of a program consisting of motivational interviewing (MI) and feedback of urine cotinine to stop passive smoking (PS) in children at risk for asthma. Fifty-eight families with children 0-13 years with a high risk of asthma and PS exposure were randomised in a one-year follow-up study. The intervention group received the intervention program during 6 sessions (1/month) and the control group received measurements (questionnaires, urine cotinine, and lung function) only. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of families stopping PS (parental report verified and unverified with the child's urine cotinine concentration <10 μg/l) in children during the intervention program. The analyses were performed with Mixed Logistic Regression. After 6 months, a significant group difference was observed for the unverified parental report of stopping PS in children: 27% of parents in the intervention group versus 7% in the control group. For the verified parental report, the difference was similar (23% versus 7%) but was not statistically significant. Despite a limited sample size, the results suggest that the intervention program is probably an effective strategy to stop PS in children. A program longer than 6 months might be necessary for a longer lasting intervention effect.

Indexed as

Motivational InterviewingAdultAsthmaChildChild, PreschoolCotinineCounselingDisease SusceptibilityFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedParentsProgram EvaluationRespiratory Function TestsCotinineTobacco Smoke Pollution

Identifiers

PMID29133798
PMCPMC5684321
OpenAlexW2767560949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.