ArticleBMJ open2018
Access to care for people with alcohol use disorder in France: a mixed-method cross-sectional study protocol (ASIA).
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Screening and care for alcohol use disorder in France: expectations, barriers and levers using a mixed-methods approach.BMC public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlcohol use disorder (AUD) is a major public health concern worldwide. In France, only 10% of people with AUD (PWAUD) receive medical care. General practitioners (GP) are one of the main entry points for AUD care. The present ongoing study, entitled ASIA (Access to Care and Indifference toward Alcohol, METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The ASIA project is an ongoing cross-sectional multisite study based on a complementary mixed-method approach (quantitative and qualitative) using a convergent parallel design. The double-perspective design of the study will enable us to collect and compare data regarding both PWAUD and GP points of view. For the PWAUD quantitative study, 260 PWAUD will be interviewed using a telephone-based questionnaire. For the qualitative study, 36 PWAUD have already been interviewed. The GP quantitative study will include 100 GP in a 15 min survey. Fifteen GP have already participated in semistructured interviews for the qualitative study. Logistic regression will be used to identify predictors for access to care. With respect to data analyses, qualitative interviews will be analysed using semantic analysis while quantitative logistic regression will be used for quantitative interviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the CNIL (French National Commission on Informatics and Liberties) (approval reference number: C16-10, date of approval: 17 July 2017), the CCTIRS (Advisory Committee on Information Processing in Material Research in the Field of Health) and the CEEI (Evaluation and Ethics Committee) (approval reference number: 16-312, date of approval: 8 July 2016) of INSERM (French National Institute of Health and Medical Research). Results from ASIA will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, reports and in a PhD thesis.
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.