ArticleAfrican journal of thoracic and critical care medicine2022
Over-prescription of short-acting β
Article in African journal of thoracic and critical care medicine, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- South African Thoracic Society position statement on asthma in children, adolescents and adults.African journal of thoracic and critical care medicine · 2026Article
- Over-the-counter short-acting βNPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2024Article
- Evaluation of short-acting Beta-2-agonist prescriptions and associated clinical outcomes: Findings from the SABA use IN Asthma (SABINA) study in Asia.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Asthma medication prescription trends, including those of short-acting β Objectives: To describe demographics, disease characteristics and asthma prescription patterns in the SA cohort of the SABA use IN Asthma (SABINA) III study. Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study conducted at 12 sites across SA. Patients with asthma (aged ≥12 years) were classified by investigator-defined asthma severity, guided by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2017 recommendations, and practice type (primary/ specialist care). Data were collected using electronic case report forms. Results: Overall, 501 patients were analysed - mean (standard deviation) age, 48.4 (16.6) years; 68.3% female - of whom 70.6% and 29.4% were enrolled by primary care physicians and specialists, respectively. Most patients were classified with moderate-to-severe asthma (55.7%; GINA treatment steps 3 - 5), were overweight or obese (70.7%) and reported full healthcare reimbursement (55.5%). Asthma was partly controlled/uncontrolled in 60.3% of patients, with 46.1% experiencing ≥1 severe exacerbations in the 12 months before the study visit. Overall, 74.9% of patients were prescribed ≥3 SABA canisters in the previous 12 months (over-prescription); 56.5% were prescribed ≥10 SABA canisters. Additionally, 27.1% of patients reported purchasing SABA over-the-counter (OTC); among patients with both SABA purchase and prescriptions, 75.4% and 51.5% already received prescriptions for ≥3 and ≥10 SABA canisters, respectively, in the preceding 12 months. Conclusion: SABA over-prescription and OTC purchase were common in SA, demonstrating an urgent need to align clinical practices with the latest evidence-based recommendations and regulate SABA OTC purchase to improve asthma outcomes. Study synopsis:
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.