GOLD COPD categories are not fit for purpose in primary care.

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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

1. The Prospective Non-Interventional DACCORD Study in the National COPD Registry in Germany: design and methods.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2015
   Trial
2. Rectifying COPD management: a critical analysis of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease strategy.ERJ open research · 2026
   Review
3. Primary care risk stratification in COPD using routinely collected data: a secondary data analysis.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2019
   Article
4. External validation of multidimensional prognostic indices (ADO, BODEx and DOSE) in a primary care international cohort (PROEPOC/COPD cohort).BMC pulmonary medicine · 2016
   Observational
5. Investigating sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, COPD Assessment Test, and Modified Medical Research Council scale according to GOLD using St George's Respiratory Questionnaire cutoff 25 (and 20) as reference.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2016
   Article
6. Continuing to Confront COPD International Physician Survey: physician knowledge and application of COPD management guidelines in 12 countries.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2015
   Article
7. Little agreement in GOLD category using CAT and mMRC in 450 primary care COPD patients in New Zealand.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2014
   Article
8. A golden goal in 2010, and another GOLD in 2014 in primary care, or vice versa.Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group · 2014
   Article
9. Tailoring of corticosteroids in COPD management.Current respiratory care reports · 2014
   Review
10. Assessment of COPD in primary care: new evidence supports use of the DOSE index.Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group · 2013
    Article
11. Usefulness of the COPD assessment test (CAT) in primary care.Primary care respiratory journal : journal of the General Practice Airways Group · 2013
    Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  GOLD COPD categories are not fit for purpose in primary care--authors' reply.2013
• Comment on
  GOLD and ABCD--a good start, but now for the evidence?2013

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as