ArticleBMJ open2022
How is the organisational settings, content and availability of comprehensive multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation for people with COPD in primary healthcare in Norway: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Agency as a catalyst in pulmonary rehabilitation implementation: Physiotherapists' perspectives.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2026Article
- A Novel Concentrated, Interdisciplinary Group Rehabilitation Program for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Protocol for a Nonrandomized Clinical Intervention Study.JMIR research protocols · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the organisational settings, content and availability of comprehensive multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programmes for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in primary healthcare in Norway.
designThis was a cross-sectional survey study examining the content, organisational settings and availability of comprehensive multidisciplinary PR for people with COPD. SETTING AND
participantsWhen the survey was conducted, Norway had 436 municipalities/primary healthcare services who were invited to participate. OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was the question related to accessibility to a PR programme in primary healthcare. We also examined in what degree the single interventions which are a part of a PR programme were one of the municipalities services and if there were regional differences regarding PR.
resultsOf the 436 municipalities, 158 answered the survey (36% response rate), and the survey covered for 45% of the total population in Norway. Five per cent of the responders reported having multidisciplinary PR for patients with COPD. The most frequently reported single interventions that can be a part of a multidisciplinary PR programme were reported as follows: group exercise training for all diagnoses (27%), reablement (25%) and home-care treatment by a physiotherapist and/or occupational therapist (24%). Southern-Eastern Norway had a significantly lower number of these interventions than Western Norway, Central Norway, and Northern Norway (p<0.001).
conclusionOnly 5% of the Norwegian primary healthcare services (municipalities) had a multidisciplinary PR programme for patients with COPD. PR is the most important and cost-effective treatment within integrated care of patients with COPD. National strategies are therefore needed to increase the availability of PR for patients with COPD in Norwegian municipalities.
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.