ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2020
Interchangeability between two breath-by-breath O
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe interchangeability analysis has been recently proposed to objectively assess whether a newly developed measurement tool can substitute the older ones; this analysis assumes that the measures yielded by the compared tools should differ less than a maximum acceptable value. We aimed to assess the interchangeability rate (IR) of the breath-by-breath O
methodsOxygen, carbon dioxide fractions, and ventilatory flow were recorded continuously over 26 min in 18 asthmatic and 20 well-matched healthy volunteers at rest, during cycling, and recovery; oxygen uptake (V'O
resultsCVs were significantly greater in the asthmatic volunteers (F = 5.97, p < 0.05), being lower for IND compared to EXP (F > 7.04, p < 0.02). CVs decreased as a function of the reciprocal of the square root of the average V'O
conclusionThe relative noise of V'O
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.