Morice 2001.

Methods	STUDY DESIGN: Parallel group trial LOCATION, NUMBER OF CENTRES: UK, large teaching hospital DURATION OF STUDY: 18 months DESCRIPTION OF WITHDRAWALS/DROPOUTS: 10 out of 40 in the control group and 5 out of 40 in the intervention group did not return responded to the questionnaire TYPE OF ANALYSIS (AVAILABLE CASE/TREATMENT RECEIVED/ ITT): Intention‐to‐treat analysis COMPLIANCE: Not assessed CONFOUNDERS: Not mentioned
Participants	N SCREENED: 80 N RANDOMISED: 80 N COMPLETED (at 6 months): 65 M = 53 F = 27 MEAN AGE: 36.1 years CHARACTERISTICS: Prior use of ICS at 1 mg: 47.5% INCLUSION CRITERIA: admitted on the general medical take to a large teaching hospital with a documented primary diagnosis of acute asthma EXCLUSION CRITERIA: chronic obstructive respiratory disease, previously participated in an educational programme from a hospital‐based asthma nurse, unable or unwilling to complete a series of follow‐up questionnaires
Interventions	Education group: subsequent visits of the asthma nurse until discharge from hospital. A minimum of 2 sessions of 30 minutes each; 1)discussion about mechanisms, triggers and booklet 2) summary of first session, self‐management plan peak flow meter+instructions and Sheffield Asthma Card with emergency phone numbers and, 3) last visit where patients were encouraged to express fears or anxieties related to their home management Control group: usual care Both groups: seen by the asthma nurse as a single interviewer within 48 hours of admission FOLLOW‐UP PERIOD: 18 months
Outcomes	Preferred action taken on worsening of asthma symptoms (GP urgent visits, GP call‐outs, accident and emergency visits, re‐admissions); withdrawal/loss to follow up
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Information not available
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Information not available
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Study participants aware as to treatment group assignment Information on blinding of outcome assessors not clear
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	10 out of 40 in the control group and 5 out of 40 in the intervention group did not return responded to the questionnaire. Analysis described as intention‐to‐treat.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Review primary outcome measured, analysed and disclosed in full.
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias could be identified.