ArticleNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2019
Effects of the Spirometry Learning Module on the knowledge, confidence, and experience of spirometry operators.
Article in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disease Burden, Treatment Patterns and Asthma Control in Adult Patients with Asthma in China: A Real-World Study.Journal of asthma and allergy · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence based software facilitates spirometry quality control in asthma and COPD clinical trials.ERJ open research · 2023Article
- Spirometry practice and the impact of a phase 1 training workshop among health workers in southern Nigeria: a cross-sectional study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our study measures effects of the Spirometry Learning Module (SLM) on health-care professionals' knowledge of spirometry test quality and perceived confidence, experience, and understanding of spirometry measurements and interpretation. Professionals from both primary and hospital-based settings enrolled in the SLM, a training model focusing on spirometry test performance and interpretation, including an online interactive learning component and a face-to-face workshop. Participants were asked to submit patient spirometry assessment worksheets for feedback on quality and interpretation. Data were collected at baseline, SLM completion (20 weeks), and 12 months after SLM completion. Knowledge of spirometry test quality was evaluated with questions relating to five case-based assessments of common spirometric patterns. Perceived confidence, experience, and knowledge in test performance were measured using a 7-point Likert scale. The Friedman test combined with post hoc analyses were used to analyse differences between baseline, 20-week, and 12-month post completion. Qualitative interviews were performed to assess reasons for non-completion. Of the 90 participants enrolled in the SLM and consented to research, 48 completed the 20-week measurement and 11 completed the 12-month measurement. Statistically significant improvements were detected in all outcomes in participants who completed the SLM to 20-week and 12-month follow-up assessments (all p values < 0.01). Barriers to completion were limited access to patients requiring spirometry, high clinic workload, and having a different spirometer at the workplace compared to the one used during SLM demonstrations. Our data suggest that participants' confidence, experience, and knowledge regarding spirometry may improve through SLM completion.
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.