Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26901166›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

How Reliable Are Current Data for Assessing the Actual Prevalence of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease?

Anna Maria Romanelli, Mauro Raciti, Maria Angela Protti, Renato Prediletto, Edo Fornai, Annunziata Faustini

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Trait Insights Gained by Comparing Genome-Wide Association Study Results using Different Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Definitions.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020
    Article
  5. Hospitalization Rates for Respiratory Diseases After L'Aquila Earthquake.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Anna Maria RomanelliCNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy.
Mauro RacitiCNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy.
Maria Angela ProttiCNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy.
Renato PredilettoCNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy.
Edo FornaiCNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy.
Annunziata FaustiniDepartment of Epidemiology, Regional Health Service, Lazio Region, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEstimating COPD occurrence is perceived by the scientific community as a matter of increasing interest because of the worldwide diffusion of the disease. We aimed to estimate COPD prevalence by using administrative databases from a city in central Italy for 2002-2006, improving both the sensitivity and the reliability of the estimate.

methodsMultiple sources were used, integrating the hospital discharge register (HDR), clinical charts, spirometry and the cause-specific mortality register (CMR) in a longitudinal algorithm, to reduce underestimation of COPD prevalence. Prevalence was also estimated on the basis of COPD cases confirmed through spirometry, to correct misclassification. Estimating such prevalence relied on using coefficients of validation, derived as the positive predictive value (PPV) for being an actual COPD case from clinical and spirometric data at the Institute of Clinical Physiology of the National Research Council.

resultsWe found that sensitivity of COPD prevalence increased by 37%. The highest estimate (4.43 per 100 residents) was observed in the 5-year period, using a 3-year longitudinal approach and combined data from three sources. We found that 17% of COPD cases were misclassified. The above estimate of COPD prevalence decreased (3.66 per 100 residents) when coefficients of validation were applied. The PPV was 80% for the HDR, 82% for clinical diagnoses and 91% for the CMR.

conclusionsAdjusting the COPD prevalence for both underestimation and misclassification of the cases makes administrative data more reliable for epidemiological purposes.

Indexed as

RegistriesAdultAgedFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedPrevalencePulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID26901166
PMCPMC4763569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.