Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 158

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

An Evaluation of an Innovative Multimedia Educational Software Program for Asthma Management: Report of a Randomized, Controlled Trial

Homer, Charles, Susskind, Oded, Alpert, Hillel R., Owusu, MPM§; Celestina, Schneider, Lynda, Rappaport, Leonard A., Rubin, David H.·2000·Pediatrics

Abstract

Background.: Asthma continues to be a substantial cause of morbidity in pediatric populations. New strategies are needed to provide cost-effective educational interventions for children with asthma, particularly those in the inner city. Objective.: To assess the effectiveness of a multimedia educational software program about asthma. Setting.: A hospital-based primary care clinic and an affiliated neighborhood health center. Design.: Randomized, controlled trial. Population.: Children 3 to 12 years old with physician-diagnosed asthma. Intervention.: An interactive educational computer program, Asthma Control, designed to teach children about asthma and its management. Using a graphic display of a child going through simulated daily events, the game emphasizes: 1) monitoring; 2) allergen identification; 3) use of medications; 4) use of health services; and 5) maintenance of normal activity. Control group participants reviewed printed educational materials with a research assistant. Outcomes.: Acute health care use (emergency department and outpatient) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcome measures included maternal report of asthma symptom severity, child functional status and school absences, satisfaction with care, and parental and child knowledge of asthma. Results.: A total of 137 families were enrolled in the study (76 intervention, 61 control). Both intervention and control groups showed substantial improvement in all outcomes during the 12-month follow-up period. Aside from improvement in knowledge after use of the computer program, no differences were demonstrated between the 2 groups in primary or secondary outcome measures. Children reported enjoyment of program use. Conclusions.: This trial of an educational software program found that it did not produce greater improvement than occurred with review of traditional written materials. Because both groups showed substantial improvement over baseline, computer-based education may be more cost-effective. Alternatively, improvements in illness severity over time may overshadow the effects of such interventions. Rigorous comprehensive evaluations such as this are necessary to assess new interventions intended to improve management and outcomes of asthma.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.106.s1.210

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 158

Metadata

Authors
Homer, C., Susskind, O., Alpert, H. R., Owusu, M. C., Schneider, L., Rappaport, L. A., & Rubin, D. H.
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2000-07-01
Volume
106
Issue
Supplement_1
Pages
210-215
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W1901649809
Cited by
158
References
0
FWCI
3.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Evaluation of an Innovative Multimedia Educational Software Program for Asthma Management: Report of a Randomized, Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1542/peds.106.s1.210
The paper
Homer, C., Susskind, O., Alpert, H. R., Owusu, M. C., Schneider, L., Rappaport, L. A., & Rubin, D. H. (2000). An Evaluation of an Innovative Multimedia Educational Software Program for Asthma Management: Report of a Randomized, Controlled Trial. Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.106.s1.210

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.