Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29881264›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2018

Chronic obstructive lung disease "expert system": validation of a predictive tool for assisting diagnosis.

Fulvio Braido, Pierachille Santus, Angelo Guido Corsico, Fabiano Di Marco, Giovanni Melioli, Nicola Scichilone, Paolo Solidoro

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Fulvio BraidoDepartment of Internal Medicine, IRCCS San Martino di Genova University Hospital, Genoa, Italy.
Pierachille SantusDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Milan, Division of Respiratory Diseases, "L. Sacco" University Hospital, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, Milan, Italy.
Angelo Guido CorsicoDepartment of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, Division of Respiratory Diseases, IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation, University of Pavia, Italy.
Fabiano Di MarcoDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Milan, San Paolo Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Giovanni MelioliCenter for Precision Medicine, Asthma, and Allergy, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy.
Nicola ScichiloneDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Paolo SolidoroUnit of Pulmonology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The purposes of this study were development and validation of an expert system (ES) aimed at supporting the diagnosis of chronic obstructive lung disease (COLD). Methods: A questionnaire and a WebFlex code were developed and validated in silico. An expert panel pilot validation on 60 cases and a clinical validation on 241 cases were performed. Results: The developed questionnaire and code validated in silico resulted in a suitable tool to support the medical diagnosis. The clinical validation of the ES was performed in an academic setting that included six different reference centers for respiratory diseases. The results of the ES expressed as a score associated with the risk of suffering from COLD were matched and compared with the final clinical diagnoses. A set of 60 patients were evaluated by a pilot expert panel validation with the aim of calculating the sample size for the clinical validation study. The concordance analysis between these preliminary ES scores and diagnoses performed by the experts indicated that the accuracy was 94.7% when both experts and the system confirmed the COLD diagnosis and 86.3% when COLD was excluded. Based on these results, the sample size of the validation set was established in 240 patients. The clinical validation, performed on 241 patients, resulted in ES accuracy of 97.5%, with confirmed COLD diagnosis in 53.6% of the cases and excluded COLD diagnosis in 32% of the cases. In 11.2% of cases, a diagnosis of COLD was made by the experts, although the imaging results showed a potential concomitant disorder. Conclusion: The ES presented here (COLD

Indexed as

Expert SystemsSoftware DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesAgedAge FactorsAsthmaChronic DiseaseCoughHumansMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveSample SizeSpirometrychronic obstructive lung diseasesdiagnosisexpert systems

Identifiers

PMID29881264
PMCPMC5978461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.