Trial reportThorax2003
Repeatability of airway resistance measurements made using the interrupter technique.
Trial report in Thorax, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Inhaled corticosteroids for non-specific chronic cough in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2005Pooled it
- Lung Function Assessment in Pediatric Asthma: Selecting the Optimal Tests for Clinical and Research Applications.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Effects of the menstrual cycle on expiratory resistance during whole body exercise in females.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2008Article
- Endpoints for clinical trials in young children with cystic fibrosis.Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society · 2007Review
- Plethysmograph and interrupter resistance measurements in prematurely born young children.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo be able to interpret any measurement, its repeatability should be known. This study reports the repeatability of airway resistance measurements using the interrupter technique (Rint) in children with and without respiratory symptoms.
methodsChildren aged 2-10 years who were healthy, had persistent isolated cough, or who had previous wheeze were studied. On the same occasion, three Rint measurements were made 15 minutes apart, before and after placebo and salbutamol given in random order. Results from those given placebo first were analysed for within-occasion repeatability. Between-occasion repeatability measurements were made 2-20 weeks apart (median 3 weeks).
resultsFor 85 pairs of measurements before and after placebo the limits of agreement were 20% expected resistance and were unaffected by age or health status. The change in resistance following bronchodilator in one of 18 healthy children, 12 of 28 with cough, and 22 of 39 with wheeze exceeded this threshold. For between-occasion measurements the limits of agreement were 32% in 72 healthy subjects, 49% in 57 with cough, and 53% in 95 with previous wheeze.
conclusionThe measurement of airways resistance by the interrupter technique is clinically meaningful when change following an intervention such as the administration of bronchodilator is greater than its within-occasion repeatability. Between-occasion repeatability is too poor to judge change confidently.
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.