Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30237709›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2018

The role of CAT in evaluating the response to treatment of patients with AECOPD.

Aiyuan Zhou, Zijing Zhou, Yating Peng, Yiyang Zhao, Jiaxi Duan, Ping Chen

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Lung volume reduction surgeryThe European respiratory journal · 2023
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

6 authors.

Aiyuan ZhouDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410011, China, pingchen0731@csu.edu.cn.
Zijing ZhouDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410011, China, pingchen0731@csu.edu.cn.
Yating PengDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410011, China, pingchen0731@csu.edu.cn.
Yiyang ZhaoDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410011, China, pingchen0731@csu.edu.cn.
Jiaxi DuanDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410011, China, pingchen0731@csu.edu.cn.
Ping ChenDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410011, China, pingchen0731@csu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) Assessment Test (CAT) questionnaire is a short patient-completed questionnaire, which is used to assess the health status of patients with stable COPD. However, whether it is a good tool to evaluate the response to treatment in acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) has been less studied. Methods: The patients were assessed at two visits, at admission and on the seventh day. Anthropometric variables were collected at admission. CAT and lung function were measured twice at the above time points. At the second visit, the health status of the patients were divided into five groups based on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 5, which represents "much better," "slightly better," "no change," "slightly worse," and "much worse." Responders were those who reported "much better" or "slightly better," and nonresponders were those who claimed "no change," "worse," or "much worse." Results: In total, 225 patients were recruited. The average CAT score at admission was 24.82±7.41, which declined to 17.41±7.35 on the seventh day. There were 81.33% responders, whose improvement in CAT score (9.37±5.24) was much higher than that of the nonresponders (-1.36±4.35). A moderate correlation was observed between the changes in CAT score and improvement in FEV Conclusion: The evolution of CAT scores during exacerbation can provide useful information to assess the health status of patients with AECOPD. A 3.5-unit improvement in CAT score is the best cutoff to differentiate between patients who have a response or no response to treatment, which offers a convenient and easy way for clinicians to monitor the health status of patients with an AECOPD.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionHealth StatusAgedChinaFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMalePulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveSymptom Assessmentacute exacerbationCATCOPDcurative effect

Identifiers

PMID30237709
PMCPMC6138970

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.