Observational studyInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2016
Risk stratification for COPD diagnosis through an active search strategy in primary care.
Observational study in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2016. 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.
- Utility of Self-Administered Questionnaires for Identifying Individuals at Risk of COPD in Japan: The OCEAN (Okinawa COPD casE finding AssessmeNt) Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2021Observational
- Risk Factors for Depression in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to identify the percentage of undiagnosed patients with COPD through the implementation of an active search strategy in a selected subject population.
methodsAn observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study was conducted in a primary care setting in Spain. General practitioners gave their diagnostic impression of COPD (yes/no) on the basis of clinical criteria of subjects with respiratory symptoms and tobacco exposure. Subsequently, post-bronchodilator spirometry and quality-of-life tests were performed. Multivariate logistic regression techniques using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to identify the combination of variables that best discriminates COPD.
resultsA total of 2,758 patients were screened at 368 primary care centers, of which 1,725 patients were included in the study. Seven hundred and ninety-three patients (46%) were diagnosed with COPD. Clinical judgment resulted in suspected COPD in 1,393 (81%) of the subjects. The best variables to discriminate COPD were a history of lower respiratory tract infections, cough, and dyspnea. This combination identified COPD with a ROCAUC of 0.61 denoting a poor discriminative ability.
conclusionEmploying an active search strategy leads to a new COPD diagnosis in almost half of the subjects. Screening of COPD with post-bronchodilator spirometry should be considered mandatory for any high-risk subject visiting the general practitioner clinic for any reason.
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.