Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31631999›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2019

Benefits of different intensities of pulmonary rehabilitation for patients with moderate-to-severe COPD according to the GOLD stage: a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial.

Guo Xia He, Ning Li, Lei Ren, Hong Hua Shen, Ning Liao, Jian Jun Wen, Yi Min Xu, Jing Wang, Qing Yun Li

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Guo Xia He *Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200025, People's Republic of China.
Ning Li *Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200025, People's Republic of China.
Lei Ren *Department of Respiratory Rehabilitation, The Fourth Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai (Shanghai Jingan Geriatric Hospital), Shanghai 200042, People's Republic of China.
Hong Hua ShenDepartment of Respiratory Rehabilitation, The Fourth Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai (Shanghai Jingan Geriatric Hospital), Shanghai 200042, People's Republic of China.
Ning LiaoWest-Nanjing Road Community Health-care Center of Shanghai, Shanghai 200040, People's Republic of China.
Jian Jun WenCaojiadu Community Health Service of Shanghai, Shanghai 200042, People's Republic of China.
Yi Min XuDepartment of Respiratory Rehabilitation, The Fourth Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai (Shanghai Jingan Geriatric Hospital), Shanghai 200042, People's Republic of China.
Jing WangDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Suzhou University, Jiangsu 215004, People's Republic of China.
Qing Yun LiDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200025, People's Republic of China.
YangPu Geriatric Hospital · CNRuijin Hospital · CNSecond Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University · CNSoochow University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is essential to manage patients with COPD. The aim of this study was to investigate the appropriate intensity of PR exercise training for patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Patients and methods: A prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted from January 2014 to October 2018. The subjects were randomly assigned to three groups with different intensities of PR, according to their maximum oxygen uptake percentage determined by cardiopulmonary exercise testing. After 20 weeks of exercise training, the effects of low-, moderate-, and high-intensity exercise interventions on patients were compared to determine the most appropriate PR prescription. Results: For patients with moderate COPD, all the measured parameters were significantly improved in the moderate- and high-intensity PR groups ( Conclusion: High-intensity PR exercise is helpful for patients with moderate to severe COPD. Moderate COPD patients need to receive intensive PR training; the improvement degrees from PR intervention were higher than those of the severe COPD patients. For patients with severe COPD, high-intensity PR exercise may be more beneficial if patients can tolerate it.

Indexed as

Exercise TherapyAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveSeverity of Illness IndexSingle-Blind Methodcardiopulmonary exercise testingchronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseexercise therapypulmonary rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID31631999
PMCPMC6790109
OpenAlexW2978077351

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.