ArticleRespiratory physiology & neurobiology2018
Flow limitation and dysanapsis in children and adolescents with exertional dyspnea.
Article in Respiratory physiology & neurobiology, 2018. 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.
- Bronchodilator responsiveness and dysanapsis in bronchopulmonary dysplasia.ERJ open research · 2022Article
- Ventilatory Limitation of Exercise in Pediatric Subjects Evaluated for Exertional Dyspnea.Frontiers in physiology · 2019Article
- Spirometric and exercise ventilatory predictors of expiratory flow-limitation in adults with normal and mildly-obstructed airways.Respiratory physiology & neurobiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The consequence of dysanapsis, quantitated by dysanapsis ratio (DR), on expiratory flow limitation (EFL) during exercise in pediatric subjects was examined. EFL occurred in 80 (56%) subjects from an enriched sample of children and adolescents tested during investigation of exertional dyspnea. DR was lower in subjects with vs without EFL during exercise: (0.055 ± 0.015 vs 0.067 ± 0.017, p < 0.001), and lower ratio correlated with greater extent of EFL (r = -0.64, p < 0.001). EFL was seen more often in boys: 67% vs 46% (p = 0.01), as girls had higher DR (0.063 ± 0.016 vs 0.056 ± 0.018, p = 0.007). Lower FEV
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.