ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2022
Annual and Post-Exacerbation Follow-Up of Asthma Patients in Clinical Practice - A Large Population-Based Study in Sweden.
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 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.
- Asthma/COPD clinics increases adherence to management guidelines and associates with less morbidity and lower all-cause mortality - a prospective cohort study.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- Shared decision making - a review of its evaluation, efficacy, and applicability in asthma.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- The use of precision medicine for asthma.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Impact of Post-Visit Outreach on Inhaled Corticosteroid Refill Persistence in Children and Young Adults With Asthma.Respiratory care · 2023Article
- Over-the-counter use of short-acting beta-2 agonists: a systematic review.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Symptom control has not improved in Swedish asthma patients during the last two decades. Guidelines recommend annual reviews for asthma patients treated with maintenance inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). We aimed to describe how visit patterns in an ICS-treated asthma population in Sweden were related to applicable asthma guidelines. Methods: Swedish electronic health data for incident asthma patients, ≥18 years, with at least one ICS collection (index date) between 2006 and 2017 were included. Exacerbations were defined as hospitalizations, emergency visits, or collection of oral corticosteroids (OCS). Probability of an asthma-related regular follow-up visit and probability of a follow-up visit after an exacerbation, both within 15 months, were estimated using the cumulative incidence function, time-to-event analysis, and incident rate ratios. Results: In 51,349 asthma patients (mean age 47.6 years, 63% females), 17,573 had a regular asthma visit in primary or secondary care within 15 months after the index, yielding an overall probability of a visit of 37.4%. Patients with a follow-up visit had higher ICS collection and lower OCS collection than patients without regular visits. Among 22,097 patients with acute exacerbations, the probability of a visit within 15 months after an exacerbation was 31.0%. The probability of having a visit increased during the study period. Conclusion: Only one-third of ICS-treated asthma patients, regardless of asthma severity, had a regular or post-exacerbation follow-up visit within a 15-month period. The consequences of this lack of adherence to guidelines need further evaluation to secure optimal asthma management.
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.