ArticlePEC innovation2024
A self-management package for pulmonary fibrosis: A feasibility study.
Article in PEC innovation, 2024. 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.
- A randomised clinical trial of a digital self-management package for people with interstitial lung disease: the REBUILD-SM protocol.Respiratory research · 2025Article
- Living with pulmonary fibrosis: how affected people experience disease-related information, health services and self-management strategies.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Article
- Specific content for education and self-management programmes for people with pulmonary fibrosis: a co-creation, multiphase, mixed-method study.ERJ open research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: There is currently no self-management package designed to meet the needs of people with pulmonary fibrosis (PF). This study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a PF-specific self-management package. Methods: Adults with PF were randomly allocated (1:1) to either receive the self-management package with healthcare professional (HCP) support or standardised PF information. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, breathlessness, daily steps, use of PF-related treatments, and healthcare utilisation. Participants' experiences of using the package were explored using qualitative interviews. Results: Thirty participants were included. Recruitment rate was 91% and 100% of those recruited were randomised. Eighty-seven percent of participants who received the package read ≥1 module and set a goal. Secondary outcomes were feasible to collect with high assessment completion rates (87%). Most participants reported the package was easy to use and enhanced knowledge, but suggested some improvements, while HCP support was highly valued. Conclusion: A PF-specific self-management package was feasible to deliver and requires further testing in a trial powered to detect changes in clinical outcomes. Innovation: This is the first self-management package designed specifically for people with PF, informed by patient experience and expert consensus.
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.