Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21486723›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2011

Lung function in our aging population.

Wolfgang Marek, E M Marek, K Mückenhoff, H-J Smith, N Kotschy-Lang, M Kohlhäufl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of medical research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation of peak cough flow in Brazilian healthy adults.International archives of medicine · 2012
    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

6 authors.

Wolfgang MarekInstitute for Occupational Physiology, Augusta-Kranken-Anstalt, Bergstr. 23, 44791 Bochum, Germany. Wolfgang.Marek@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
E M Marek
K Mückenhoff
H-J Smith
N Kotschy-Lang
M Kohlhäufl

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledAIMS OF INVESTIGATION: The chronological age of the Caucasian population and their anthropometrical data have significantly changed within the last five decades. Therefore the question arises whether or not the commonly used reference values of the European Community (ECCS) for lung function may still be accepted today. Since these values were obtained in the 1960s from subjects in a limited age range. For the elderly, the measured values are deduced by extrapolation beyond the range of reference equations which had been obtained in a different population. Therefore decisions concerning elderly and smaller subjects concerning remuneration due to impaired lung function after industrial exposure on the basis of EGKS values are questionable.

methodsLung function tests were performed by pneumotachography, recording static lung volumes and flow-volume-curves in 262 asymptomatic non smoking males, aged 20 to 90 years. Measurements were performed with the MasterLab, or PneumoScreen systems (CareFusion, Höchberg). RESULTS were compared to the reference values of ECCS, SAPALDIA and LuftiBus. -

resultsFor simplicity analysis of age and height dependence of investigated respiratory parameters (VC, FVC, FEV⊂1, FEV⊂1%FVC, PEF, MEF⊂75,50,25) can be described by linear functions (y = a * height ? b * age + c). The forced expiratory vital capacity, FVC, was calculated by FVC = 0.0615*H - 0.0308*A - 4.673; r = 0.78. Mean FVC for younger subjects was found to be 104.7 ± 10.7% of the ECCS reference values and 96.5 ± 11.8 % in older subjects. For most parameters investigated linear regressions on age were steeper than described by the ECCS reference values. The regression of lung function to height largely follows the ECCS prescriptions. SUMMARY: Bochum lung function values of younger healthy subjects were higher compared to the reference values of the ECCS and showed a steeper age descent. The alternatively discussed reference values of the SAPALDIA-, or LuftiBus-Study are higher, but do not cover all necessary parameters and/or the age range. A multi centre study for contemporary reference values is recommended.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAgingFemaleHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedReference ValuesRespiratory Function Tests

Identifiers

PMID21486723
PMCPMC3352207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.