ArticleBMJ open2014
Estimating population prevalence of potential airflow obstruction using different spirometric criteria: a pooled cross-sectional analysis of persons aged 40-95 years in England and Wales.
Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- ARTP statement on pulmonary function testing 2020.BMJ open respiratory research · 2020Guideline
- Clinical characteristics of patients newly diagnosed with COPD by the fixed ratio and lower limit of normal criteria: a cross-sectional analysis of the TargetCOPD trial.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2018Trial
- Article
- Predicting parameters of airway dynamics generated from inspiratory and expiratory plethysmographic airway loops, differentiating subtypes of chronic obstructive diseases.BMJ open respiratory research · 2024Article
- Prevalence and characterisation of exercise-induced laryngeal obstruction in patients with exercise-induced dyspnoea.The Journal of laryngology and otology · 2024Article
- Do American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society Journals Have a Role in Promoting Official American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society Standards?Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Article
- Lung function in Lolland-Falster Health Study (LOFUS).The clinical respiratory journal · 2022Article
- Pulmonary Function Test Outcomes in Adult Omani Patients: Preliminary findings from a single-centre study.Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2022Article
- Functional Predictors Discriminating Asthma-COPD Overlap (ACO) from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD).International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Article
- Targeted therapy in eosinophilic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.ERJ open research · 2021Review
- The Occupational Burden of Nonmalignant Respiratory Diseases. An Official American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2019Review
- GOLD criteria overestimate airflow limitation in one-third of cases in the general Finnish population.ERJ open research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesConsistent estimation of the burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been hindered by differences in methods, including different spirometric cut-offs for impaired lung function. The impact of different definitions on the prevalence of potential airflow obstruction, and its associations with key risk factors, is evaluated using cross-sectional data from two nationally representative population surveys.
designPooled cross-sectional analysis of Wave 2 of the UK Household Longitudinal Survey and the Health Survey for England 2010, including 7879 participants, aged 40-95 years, who lived in England and Wales, without diagnosed asthma and with good-quality spirometry data. Potential airflow obstruction was defined using self-reported physician-diagnosed COPD; a fixed threshold (FT) forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity (FEV1/FVC) ratio <0.7 and an age-specific, sex-specific, height-specific and ethnic-specific lower limit of normal (LLN). Standardised questions elicited self-reported information on demography, smoking history, ethnicity, occupation, respiratory symptoms and cardiovascular disease.
resultsConsistent across definitions, participants classed with obstructed airflow were more likely to be older, currently smoke, have higher pack-years of smoking and be engaged in routine occupations. The prevalence of airflow obstruction was 2.8% (95% CI 2.3% to 3.2%), 22.2% (21.2% to 23.2%) and 13.1% (12.2% to 13.9%) according to diagnosed COPD, FT and LLN, respectively. The gap in prevalence between FT and LLN increased in older age groups. Sex differences in the risk of obstruction, after adjustment for key risk factors, was sensitive to the choice of spirometric cut-off, being significantly higher in men when using FT, compared with no significant difference using LLN.
conclusionsApplying FT or LLN spirometric cut-offs gives a different picture of the size and distribution of the disease burden. Longitudinal studies examining differences in unscheduled hospital admissions and risk of death between FT and LLN may inform the choice as to the best way to include spirometry in assessments of airflow obstruction.
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.