The feasibility of performing a study on asthma diagnostics in a community and outpatient setting.
Résumé fourni par la source
Background: Patient recruitment into research studies is challenging, with studies often failing to recruit the sample size, or from an ethnic minority population. This can lead to underpowered studies and cohorts that are unrepresentative of patient populations. Aims: To examine the recruitment rate and characteristics of participants enrolled in The London Asthma Diagnostics Study (LADS, ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT06383130 ). Methods: This is a prospective diagnostic study evaluating the accuracy of oscillometry with bronchodilator response in adults with possible asthma referred to clinics in secondary care or community diagnostic centres (CDC) in North West London. Participants undergo testing alongside FeNO and spirometry. Results: Screening logs from June to November 2024 were examined, 60 patients were identified as eligible. In total 85% (50 patients) were recruited, of which 72% (36 patients) were from CDCs. Of the 10 that did not enrol, 4 were not interested in participating in research and 6 (60%) had a language barrier which excluded them from the study. The median age was 38.5 years. 88% of the participants were Non White British including 16% Indian, 16% Any Other White background, 20% Black/African/Caribbean background. Conclusion: Integrating research into community settings may enhance recruitment in diverse patient populations. Incorporating diversity into study design is essential in producing more impactful and generalisable results
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- The feasibility of performing a study on asthma diagnostics in a community and outpatient setting.
- Date Crossref
- 27/09/2025
- Éditeur
- European Respiratory Society
- Type
- proceedings-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.