Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34937712›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Utility of a personalised

Julie M Marchant, Anne B Chang, Kobi L Schutz, Lesley Versteegh, Anne Cook, Jack Roberts, Peter S Morris, Stephanie T Yerkovich, Gabrielle B McCallum

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julie M MarchantAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia jm.marchant@qut.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-8614-1829
Anne B ChangAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Kobi L SchutzChild Health Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.
Lesley VersteeghChild Health Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.
Anne CookAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Jack RobertsAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Peter S MorrisChild Health Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.
Stephanie T YerkovichAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Gabrielle B McCallumChild Health Division, Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.
Queensland University of Technology · AUCharles Darwin University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBronchiectasis is no longer considered rare or irreversible in children, yet it remains relatively under-researched and neglected in respiratory health globally. Bronchiectasis (including chronic suppurative lung disease) causes substantial morbidity for patients and significant impact on caregivers, especially during acute respiratory exacerbations. In other chronic respiratory diseases (eg, asthma), empowering consumers with an individualised plan for management of acute exacerbations improves clinical outcomes. However, in the absence of any such data specific to bronchiectasis, action management plans are rarely currently used in children or adults with bronchiectasis. We hypothesise that providing an individualised bronchiectasis action management plan (BAMP) to children with bronchiectasis reduces non-scheduled doctor consultations, compared with not having a BAMP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre, parallel, double-blind, randomised trial involving three urban Australian hospitals commenced in June 2018 and will include 198 children, aged <19 years with bronchiectasis who had 2 or more exacerbations in the previous 18 months. Children will be randomised to having an individualised BAMP or standard care (a decoy clinic letter). Primary caregivers will then be followed up monthly for 12 months. The primary outcome is the rate of acute non-scheduled doctor visits for respiratory exacerbations by 12 months. The main secondary outcomes are cough-specific quality of life scores at 6 and 12 months, overall exacerbation rate over 12 months, and proportion of children who received timely influenza vaccination by 30 May annually. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Human Research Ethics Committees of the Northern Territory Department of Health and Menzies School of Heath Research and Queensland Children's Hospital approved the study. The results of the trial will be submitted for publication and the BAMP made available free online. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register ACTRN12618000604202.

Indexed as

BronchiectasisQuality of LifeAdolescentAnti-Bacterial AgentsChildDisease ProgressionDouble-Blind MethodEquivalence Trials as TopicHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicNorthern TerritoryRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agentschronic airways diseasepaediatric thoracic medicinerespiratory infections

Identifiers

PMID34937712
PMCPMC8704965
OpenAlexW4200390656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.