ArticlePeerJ2018
Reference norms for evaluating maximum expiratory flow of children and adolescents of the Maule Region in Chile.
Article in PeerJ, 2018. 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.
- Are anthropometric characteristics powerful markers to predict the Cooper Run Test? Actual Caucasian data.PeerJ · 2023Article
- Maximum Expiratory Flow of Children and Adolescents Living at Moderate Altitudes: Proposed Reference Values.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe norms for evaluating the maximum expiratory flow (MEF) usually are developed according to chronological age and height. However, to date, little research has been conducted using reference values that take into account the temporal changes of biological maturation. The objectives of this study were to (a) compare the MEF with those of other international studies, (b) align the MEF values with chronological and biological age, and (c) propose reference standards for children and adolescents.
methodsThe sample studied consisted of 3,566 students of both sexes (1,933 males and 1,633 females) ranging in age from 5.0 to 17.9 years old. Weight, standing height, and sitting height were measured. Body mass index was calculated. Biological maturation was predicted by using age of peak height velocity growth (APHV). MEF (L/min) was obtained by using a forced expiratory manoeuvre. Percentiles were calculated using the LMS method. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Predicted APHV was at age 14.77 ± 0.78 years for males and for females at age 12.74 ± 1.0 years. Biological age was more useful than chronological age for assessing MEF in both sexes. Based on these findings, regional percentiles were created to diagnose and monitor the risk of asthma and the general expiratory status of paediatric populations.
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.