ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Laryngeal measurements and diagnostic tools for diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of screening tools for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary health care: Rapid evidence synthesis.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2021Article
- [Are health district prevalence studies useful in family practice? Report of a case: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease].Atencion primaria · 2015Article
- Physical signs in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest SocietyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios of laryngeal height, lung function, and diagnostic questionnaires for screening and diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
methodsWe undertook a cross-sectional study of 233 people aged between 40 and 75 years. Measured variables were age, sex, weight, height, body mass index, tobacco use, maximum laryngeal height, and spirometry, and we administered a COPD questionnaire and the Lung Function Questionnaire.
resultsFor laryngeal height, we found a positive likelihood ratio of 5.21, and for the Lung Function Questionnaire, we found a negative likelihood ratio of 0.10. Combining a maximum laryngeal height of ≤4 cm with Lung Function Questionnaire findings of ≤18 yielded a positive likelihood ratio of 29.06, and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.26.
conclusionsThe intrinsic validity of the lung function questionnaire makes it useful for screening. Combining Lung Function Questionnaire results and laryngeal height can help confirm or dismiss 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.