Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
The Báa nnilah Program: Results of a Chronic-Illness Self-Management Cluster Randomized Trial with the Apsáalooke Nation.
Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Indigenous people in Montana are disproportionately affected by chronic illness (CI), a legacy of settler colonialism. Existing programs addressing CI self-management are not appropriate because they are not consonant with Indigenous cultures in general and the Apsáalooke culture specifically. A research partnership between the Apsáalooke (Crow Nation) non-profit organization Messengers for Health and Montana State University co-developed, implemented, and evaluated a CI self-management program for community members. This article examines qualitative and quantitative program impacts using a pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial design with intervention and waitlist control arms. The quantitative and qualitative data resulted in different stories on the impact of the Báa nnilah program. Neither of the quantitative hypotheses were supported with one exception. The qualitative data showed substantial positive outcomes across multiple areas. We examine why the data sets led to two very different stories, and provide study strengths and limitations, recommendations, and future directions.
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.