Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35932183›Full record

ReviewPediatric pulmonology2022

Planning a digital intervention for adolescents with asthma (BREATHE4T): A theory-, evidence- and Person-Based Approach to identify key behavioural issues.

Stephanie Easton, Ben Ainsworth, Mike Thomas, Sue Latter, Rebecca Knibb, Amber Cook, Sam Wilding, Michael Bahrami-Hessari, Erika Kennington, Denise Gibson and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric pulmonology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

13 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephanie EastonNIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3857-8337
Ben AinsworthDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Mike ThomasPrimary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Sue LatterSchool of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Rebecca KnibbSchool of Psychology, College of Health and Life Sciences, University of Aston, Birmingham, UK.
Amber CookNIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Sam WildingClinical Trials Unit, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Michael Bahrami-HessariNIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6363-4025
Erika KenningtonAsthma+Lung UK, London, UK.
Denise GibsonPhysiotherapy Department, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Hannah WilkinsPhysiotherapy Department, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Lucy YardleyCentre for Clinical and Community Applications of Health Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Graham RobertsNIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GBSouthampton Hospital · USUniversity of Southampton · GBAsthma UK · GBAston University · GBNIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre · GBSouthampton General Hospital · GBUniversity of Bath · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB‐PG‐0817‐20038
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe a transparent approach to planning a digital intervention for adolescents to self-manage their asthma using breathing retraining (BRT), based on an existing, effective adult intervention (BREATHE).

methodsA theory-, evidence-, and Person-Based Approach was used to maximise the effectiveness and persuasiveness of the intervention. A scoping review and semistructured interviews with target intervention users (N = 18, adolescents aged 12-17 years with asthma and parents) were carried out to explore user perspectives, barriers, and facilitators towards the intended behaviours and potential intervention features. The combined evidence was used alongside and to inform theory-based activities and enabled iterative planning of the intervention.

resultsThe scoping review identified themes relating to user-specific self-management issues, content, education, training needs, and features for a digital intervention. Interviews elicited potential barriers to intended behaviours such as the anticipated embarrassment of using BRT and concerns around remaining calm. Facilitators included BRT delivered by adolescents who share experiences of asthma and information for performing exercises discreetly. Relevant theoretical frameworks ensured that appropriate psychological constructs were targeted. A behavioural analysis identified six intervention functions and thirty behaviour change techniques. Logic modelling mapped the programme theory and mechanisms, which aims to improve adolescent asthma-related quality of life.

conclusionsThis study gives a transparent insight into the approach followed to plan a self-guided BRT intervention for adolescents and has led to identification of key behavioural issues, enabling relevant intervention content to be chosen. Insight has been given into adolescent perceptions of BRT, which facilitated development of the prototype intervention.

Indexed as

AsthmaSelf-ManagementAdolescentAdultExercise TherapyHumansQuality of Lifeadolescenceasthmabreathing retrainingdigital interventionself-management

Identifiers

PMID35932183
PMCPMC9826240
OpenAlexW4290005782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.