Trial reportThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice
Patient Advocates for Low-Income Adults with Moderate to Severe Asthma: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01972308 (A Patient Advocate to Improve Real-world Asthma Management for Inner City Adults), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
A Patient Advocate to Improve Real-world Asthma Management for Inner City Adults
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding Autonomy in Patients with Moderate to Severe Asthma.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2022Trial
- Article
- Non-emergency department (ED) interventions to reduce ED utilization: a scoping review.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Health literacy and asthma: An update.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2024Review
- Is there a best strategy to prevent asthma exacerbations in inner-city patients with asthma?Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2024Article
- Review
- Appropriate inhaler use in children with asthma: barriers and opportunities through the lens of the socio-ecological model.The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma · 2023Review
- Health literacy in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) care: a narrative review and future directions.Respiratory research · 2022Review
- Clinic navigation and home visits to improve asthma care in low income adults with poorly controlled asthma: Before and during the pandemic.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFew interventions have targeted low-income adults with moderate to severe asthma despite their high mortality.
objectiveTo assess whether a patient advocate (PA) intervention improves asthma outcomes over usual care (UC).
methodsThis 2-armed randomized clinical trial recruited adults with moderate to severe asthma from primary care and asthma-specialty practices serving low-income neighborhoods. Patients were randomized to 6 months of a PA intervention or UC. PAs were recent college graduates anticipating health care careers, who coached, modeled, and assisted participants with preparations for asthma-related medical visits, attended visits, and confirmed participants' understanding of provider recommendations. Participants were followed for at least a year for patient-centered asthma outcomes: asthma control (primary outcome), quality of life, prednisone requirements, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations.
resultsThere were 312 participants. Their mean age was 51 years (range, 19-93 years), 69% were women, 66% African American, 8% Hispanic/Latino, 62% reported hospitalization for asthma in the year before randomization, 21% had diabetes, and 61% had a body mass index of 30 or more. Asthma control improved over 12 months, more in the intervention group (-0.45 [95% CI, -0.67 to -0.21]) than in the UC group (-0.26 [95% CI, -0.53 to -0.01]), and was sustained at 24 months but with no statistical difference between groups. The 6-month rate of emergency department visits decreased in the intervention (-0.90 [95% CI, -1.56 to -0.42]) and UC (-0.42 [95% CI, -0.72 to -0.06]) groups over 12 months. The cost of the PA program was $1521 per patient. Only 64% of those assigned had a PA visit.
conclusionsA PA may be a promising intervention to improve and sustain outcomes in this high-risk population if expanded to address factors that make keeping appointments difficult.
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.