ArticleLung2014
The ability of volumetric capnography to distinguish between chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients and normal subjects.
Article in Lung, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic accuracy of capnovolumetry for the identification of airway obstruction - results of a diagnostic study in ambulatory care.Respiratory research · 2019Article
- The Efficiency Index (EFFi), based on volumetric capnography, may allow for simple diagnosis and grading of COPD.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of our study was to evaluate volumetric capnography (VCap) in the differentiation between chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients and normal subjects. PATIENTS AND
methodsThirty-nine healthy male volunteers and 60 male COPD patients were enrolled. Regression equations between VCap indices and age, weight, height, and tidal volume in healthy volunteers were established by stepwise regression analysis. Predicted normal values of VCap indices in COPD patients were calculated. A paired t test was used to compare the difference between observed and predicted values for VCap indices in COPD patients. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the power of each VCap index alone in differentiating COPD patients and normal subjects. The power of the combination of VCap indices was assessed by discriminant analysis.
resultsAll regression equations were significant (P < 0.01) as were the differences between the observed and predicted normal VCap indices in COPD patients (P < 0.001). ROC curve analysis showed that the volume between 25 and 50% of F CO2et (Vm25-50), slope of Phase II (dC2/dV), and slope of Phase III (dC3/dV) were valuable predictors. Nearly all (90.9%) subjects were correctly classified by discriminant analysis.
conclusionVm25-50, dC2/dV, or dC3/dV alone are valuable for differentiating COPD patients and normal subjects, but more powerful are the combinations of Vm25-50, dC2/dV, and dC3/dV, the ratio of dC2/dV to dC3/dV (SR23), dead space according to the Bohr method (VDB), and dead space according to the Wolff and Brunner methods (PIE).
Indexed as
Identifiers
25022827What 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.