Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31920297›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2019

Peripheral Blood Eosinophil as a Biomarker in Outcomes of Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Hong-Xia Wu, Kai-Quan Zhuo, De-Yun Cheng

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study 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 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hong-Xia Wu *Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Kai-Quan Zhuo *Department of Neurosurgery, Suining Municipal Hospital of TCM, Suining, People's Republic of China.
De-Yun Cheng *Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Mounting evidence suggests that eosinophil levels correlate with the effects of therapy and phenotype for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to clarify the relationship between eosinophil levels and clinical outcomes in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD). Methods: A prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study was performed in three teaching hospitals. Patients were grouped by quartile percentage (0, 0.7, 2.55) and absolute blood eosinophils count (0, 0.05×10 Results: The study included 493 AECOPD patients. In the percentile-ranked groups, patients in Group 1 experienced significantly longer hospital stays, higher rates of both noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV), and heart failure than those in Group 4 (12 days vs 10 days, p = 0.005; 29.5% vs 23.6%, p = 0.007; 48.4% vs 28.5%, p = 0.001). Group 1 also had higher frequencies of respiratory failure and pulmonary heart disease compared to Groups 3 and 4 (54.8% vs 34.8%, p = 0.002; 54.8% vs 35%, p = 0.003). In the absolute count-ranked groups, patients in Group 1 had significantly higher rates of NIMV than those in Group 3 (41.1% vs 21.7%, p = 0.001), had higher rates of heart failure, respiratory failure, and pulmonary heart disease than those in Group 3 and 4 (48.1% vs 30.2%, p = 0.003; 48.1% vs 30.4%, p = 0.005; 50.8% vs 32.2%, p = 0.004; 50.8% vs 34.1%, p = 0.008; 51.9% vs 34.1%, p = 0.004; 51.9% vs 33%, p = 0.003). There were outcome differences among the admitting hospital of stays in the absolute count groups (p = 0.002), but the differences were not significant in a pairwise comparison. The proportion of ICU admissions and mortality was different in two cohorts with no difference in a pairwise comparison. Conclusion: Patients with lower eosinophil counts experienced poorer clinical outcomes. Eosinophil levels may be a helpful marker to predict outcomes in AECOPD.

Indexed as

EosinophilsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveBiomarkersChinaCorrelation of DataFemaleHospitalizationHumansLeukocyte CountMaleMiddle AgedNoninvasive VentilationPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesRespiratory InsufficiencyBiomarkersbiomarkerschronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseeosinophilsexacerbationmortality

Identifiers

PMID31920297
PMCPMC6935282
OpenAlexW2994650557

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.