ReviewEuropean clinical respiratory journal2019
Effectiveness trials: critical data to help understand how respiratory medicines really work?
Review in European clinical respiratory journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Peak Inspiratory Flow Rate in COPD: An Analysis of Clinical Trial and Real-World Data.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseTrial
- Characteristics of severe asthma patients with biologic treatment in the Swedish National Airway Register.European clinical respiratory journal · 2026Article
- Real-World Effectiveness of Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol Once-Daily Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy for Symptomatic COPD: The ELLITHE Non-Interventional Trial.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2024Article
- TRITRIAL: The Impact of Fixed Triple Therapy with Beclometasone/Formoterol/Glycopyrronium on Health Status and Adherence in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in an Italian Context of Real Life.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2024Observational
- INTREPID: single-ERJ open research · 2021Article
- Impact of Comorbidities and Commonly Used Drugs on Mortality in COPD - Real-World Data from a Primary Care Setting.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020Observational
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most of the information about the benefits, safety aspects, and cost effectiveness of pharmacological treatment in the respiratory field has been obtained from traditional efficacy studies, such as randomised controlled trials (RCT). The highly controlled environment of an RCT does not always reflect everyday practice. The collection, analysis, and application of effectiveness data to generate Real World Evidence (RWE) through pragmatic trials or observational studies therefore has the potential to improve decision making by regulators, payers, and clinicians. Despite calls for more RWE, effectiveness data are not widely used in decision making in the respiratory field. Recent advances in data capture, curation, and storage combined with new analytical tools have now made it feasible for effectiveness data to become routine sources of evidence to supplement traditional efficacy data. In this paper, we will examine some of the current data gaps, diverse types of effectiveness data, look at proposed frameworks for the positioning of effectiveness data, as well as provide examples from therapeutic areas. We will give examples of both previous effectiveness studies and studies that are ongoing within the respiratory field. Effectiveness data hold the potential to address several evidentiary gaps related to the effectiveness, safety, and value of treatments in patients with respiratory diseases.
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.