ReviewDrugs2013
Should mild COPD be treated? Evidence for early pharmacological intervention.
Review in Drugs, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wasted ventilation in mild COPD: protocol for a clinical physiology and functional imaging study.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Observational
- Early detection of COPD patients in GOLD 0 population: an observational non-interventional cohort study - MARKO study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2017Observational
- Physiologic Determinants of Exercise Capacity in Pulmonary Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis: A Multidimensional Analysis.PloS one · 2017Article
- Veterans Airflow Obstruction Screening Questionnaire: A Survey to Identify Veterans with Airflow Obstruction.Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (Miami, Fla.) · 2016Article
- A gene therapy induced emphysema model and the protective role of stem cells.Diagnostic pathology · 2014Article
- A multifactoral analysis of 1452 patients for smoking sensation. An outpatient lab experience.Journal of Cancer · 2014Article
- Outcomes for symptomatic non-obstructed individuals and individuals with mild (GOLD stage 1) COPD in a population based cohort.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedAlberto Neder, J [corrected to Neder, J Alberto]
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common and often progressive inflammatory disease of the airways that is both preventable and treatable. It is well established that those with mild-to-moderate disease severity represent the majority of patients with COPD, yet this subpopulation is relatively under-studied. Because of an insidious pre-clinical phase, COPD is both under-diagnosed and under-treated. Recent studies have confirmed that even patients with mild, grade 1 COPD [i.e. those with a reduced forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity ratio but normal FEV1], have measurable physiological impairment with increased morbidity and a higher risk of mortality compared with non-smoking healthy controls. Beyond the imperative of smoking cessation-the pivotal intervention in all COPD stages-the role of pharmacotherapy for prevention of disease progression has yet to be established. The main objective of this review is to provide a concise overview of the heterogeneous pathophysiology of COPD with only mild airway obstruction on spirometry and obstacles for early diagnosis. We emphasize that the absence of sufficiently powered trials involving a large number of patients precludes definitive recommendations in support of (or against) long-term pharmacological treatment in mild COPD. Despite these limitations, we present a rationale for earlier pharmacological intervention derived from recent physiological studies performed in symptomatic patients with mild COPD.
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.