ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2020
Spirometry Utilization Among Patients with Asthma.
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regional disparities in access to spirometry in the Brazilian public health system.Respiratory research & clinical practice · 2026Observational
- A Wearable Multimodal Wireless Sensing System for Respiratory Monitoring and Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ever Smoking is Not Associated with Performed Spirometry while Occupational Exposure and Respiratory Symptoms are.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2023Article
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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine predictors of spirometry use at a tertiary academic health system and association between receipt of spirometry and outcomes. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with an ICD-9 CM diagnostic code for asthma and a 2014 outpatient visit in either a community health center or private practice associated with a tertiary academic medical center. The main outcome was receipt of spirometry during a 2007-2015 "exposure period." We secondarily examined future hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits during a follow-up period (2016-2019).
resultsIn a sample of 394 patients, the majority were white (48%; n=188) and female (72%; n=284). Mean (SD) age was 52 years. Approximately half (185, 47%) of the patients received spirometry and 25% (n=97) saw a specialist during the exposure period. Nearly, 88% (n=85) of patients who saw a specialist received spirometry. More than half of the cohort (220/394, 56%) had an ED visit or admission during the follow-up period. Of these, 168 (76.4%) had not seen a specialist and 111 (50.5%) had not received spirometry within the exposure period. We saw no association between spirometry in the exposure window and future ED visit or hospitalization.
conclusionIn a cohort of patients at a tertiary medical center, spirometry was underused. We observed a strong association between seeing a specialist and use of spirometry, suggesting a need to better incorporate spirometry into routine primary care for patients with asthma. Among 220 patients who had an asthma-related hospitalization or ED visit in 2016-2019, the majority had no record of receiving spirometry and no documentation indicating a prior specialist visit.
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.