ArticleCureus2026
Impact of Standardized Discharge Guidelines on Outpatient Follow-Up for Pediatric Asthma Patients: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Asthma is a chronic respiratory condition and a leading cause of pediatric hospitalization. Asthma education and proper follow-up after discharge improve asthma control and reduce exacerbations. This study evaluates whether standardized discharge guidelines improved outpatient follow-up. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted on pediatric patients hospitalized with asthma between March 10 and September 9, 2024, for the pre-intervention period and between September 10, 2024, and March 10, 2025, for the post-intervention period. Outcomes from the six months before implementation of the new asthma discharge guidelines on September 10, 2024 (n = 86), were compared with those from the six months after implementation (n = 77). Primary outcomes were defined as whether referrals and scheduled follow-ups with primary care physicians (PCPs) and/or specialists were provided at discharge. Results Implementation of the consensus was not associated with significant changes in PCP follow-up timing or scheduling. The median time to the PCP appointment did not significantly differ between groups and remained three days before and after the intervention (p = 0.4959). Rates of scheduled PCP follow-up at discharge were not significantly different (52.33% vs. 42.86%; p = 0.2270). In contrast, scheduled specialist follow-up at discharge significantly improved (12.79% vs. 46.75%; p < 0.0001), as did the scheduling of specialist appointments within 30 days of discharge (13.95% vs. 33.77%; p = 0.0001). Conclusion The standardized discharge protocol correlated with more timely, scheduled follow-up with specialists. Future studies should evaluate whether the increase in specialist appointments reduces future asthma exacerbations and hospital admissions.
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.