Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19591673›Full record

ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2009

Diagnostic accuracy of spirometry in primary care.

Antonius Schneider, Lena Gindner, Lisa Tilemann, Tjard Schermer, Geert-Jan Dinant, Franz Joachim Meyer, Joachim Szecsenyi

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 128 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Antonius SchneiderInstitute of General Practice, Technische Universität München, München, Germany. antonius.schneider@lrz.tum.de
Lena Gindner
Lisa Tilemann
Tjard Schermer
Geert-Jan Dinant
Franz Joachim Meyer
Joachim Szecsenyi
University Hospital Heidelberg · DEHeidelberg University · DEMaastricht University · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NLTechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of spirometry for the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma in patients suspected of suffering from an obstructive airway disease (OAD) in primary care.

methodsCross sectional diagnostic study of 219 adult patients attending 10 general practices for the first time with complaints suspicious for OAD. All patients underwent spirometry and structured medical histories were documented. All patients received whole-body plethysmography (WBP) in a lung function laboratory. The reference standard was the Tiffeneau ratio (FEV1/VC) received by the spirometric maneuver during examination with WBP. In the event of inconclusive results, bronchial provocation was performed to determine bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR). Asthma was defined as a PC20 fall after inhaling methacholine concentration < or = 16 mg/ml.

results90 (41.1%) patients suffered from asthma, 50 (22.8%) suffered from COPD, 79 (36.1%) had no OAD. The sensitivity for diagnosing airway obstruction in COPD was 92% (95%CI 80-97); specificity was 84% (95%CI 77-89). The positive predictive value (PPV) was 63% (95%CI 51-73); negative predictive value (NPV) was 97% (95%CI 93-99). The sensitivity for diagnosing airway obstruction in asthma was 29% (95%CI 21-39); specificity was 90% (95%CI 81-95). PPV was 77% (95%CI 60-88); NPV was 53% (95%CI 45-61).

conclusionCOPD can be estimated with high diagnostic accuracy using spirometry. It is also possible to rule in asthma with spirometry. However, asthma can not be ruled out only using spirometry. This diagnostic uncertainty leads to an overestimation of asthma presence. Patients with inconclusive spirometric results should be referred for nitric oxide (NO) - measurement and/or bronchial provocation if possible to guarantee accurate diagnosis.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAsthmaCross-Sectional StudiesDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansMaleMiddle AgedPlethysmography, Whole BodyPredictive Value of TestsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveSensitivity and SpecificitySpirometry

Identifiers

PMID19591673
PMCPMC2714498
OpenAlexW1985886735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.