Trial reportThe European respiratory journal2022
Factors affecting adherence with treatment advice in a clinical trial of patients with severe asthma.
Trial report in The European respiratory journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Asthma prescribing trends, inhaler adherence and outcomes: a Real-World Data analysis of a multi-ethnic Asian Asthma population.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2024Article
- Climate-conscious inhaler prescribing for family physicians.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2024Review
- Difficult-to-treat asthma patients from ethnic minority groups in central England are at an enhanced risk of house dust mite sensitisation.Clinical and translational allergy · 2023Article
- Benefits of specialist severe asthma management: demographic and geographic disparities.The European respiratory journal · 2022Article
- Burden of allergic disease among ethnic minority groups in high-income countries.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 14 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding why patients with severe asthma do not follow healthcare provider (HCP) advice to adjust treatment is critical to achieving personalised disease management.
methodsWe reviewed patient choice to follow HCP advice to adjust asthma treatment in a UK-based randomised, controlled, single-blind (study participant), multicentre, parallel group 48-week clinical study comparing biomarker-directed treatment adjustment with standard care in severe asthma.
resultsOf 1572 treatment advisories (291 participants), instructions were followed in 1377 cases (87.6%). Patients were more likely to follow advice to remain on treatment (96.7%) than to either reduce (70.3%) or increase (67.1%) their treatment, with 64% of patients following all treatment advice. Multivariate analysis associated belonging to an ethnic minority group (OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.68-5.73) and prior study medication changes (two or more changes: OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.51-5.10) with failure to follow treatment advice. In contrast, emergency room attendance in the prior year (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.92) was associated with following treatment advice. The largest effect was seen with transition onto or off oral corticosteroids (OR 29.28, 95% CI 16.07-53.36) when compared with those requested to maintain treatment. Centre was also an important determinant regarding the likelihood of patients to follow treatment advice.
conclusionsBelonging to an ethnic minority group and multiple prior treatment adjustments were associated with not following HCP treatment advice. Patients also responded differently to HCP advice across UK specialist centres. These findings have implications for the generalisability of models of care in severe asthma and require further focused studies.
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.