ArticleThe European respiratory journal2021
Real world effects of COPD medications: a cohort study with validation against results from randomised controlled trials.
Article in The European respiratory journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emulating Six Cardiovascular Outcome Trials of Antidiabetic Drugs in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: Analyses Based on Real-World Databases from Korea and Taiwan.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Design and Implementation of Observational Studies Emulating a Target Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Prognostic risk profiling in COPD using Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2023 ABE and comorbidity assessment: evidence from a register-based COPD cohort.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Article
- Cardiorenal effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among people underrepresented in trials: analysis of routinely collected data with emulation of a reference trial (ONTARGET).American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Eligibility of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease for inclusion in randomised control trials investigating triple therapy: a study using routinely collected data.Respiratory research · 2024Article
- Article
- Evaluation of the Clinical Effectiveness of the Salmeterol/Fluticasone Fixed-Dose Combination Delivered via the ElpenhalerJournal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Towards precision in defining COPD exacerbations.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Real-world data provide the potential for generating evidence on drug treatment effects in groups excluded from trials, but rigorous, validated methodology for doing so is lacking. We investigated whether non-interventional methods applied to real-world data could reproduce results from the landmark TORCH COPD trial.We performed a historical cohort study (2000-2017) of COPD drug treatment effects in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Two control groups were selected from CPRD by applying TORCH inclusion/exclusion criteria and 1:1 matching to TORCH participants, as follows. Control group 1: people with COPD not prescribed fluticasone propionate (FP)-salmeterol (SAL); control group 2: people with COPD prescribed SAL only. FP-SAL exposed groups were then selected from CPRD by propensity score matching to each control group. Outcomes studied were COPD exacerbations, death from any cause and pneumonia.2652 FP-SAL exposed people were propensity score matched to 2652 FP-SAL unexposed people while 991 FP-SAL exposed people were propensity score matched to 991 SAL exposed people. Exacerbation rate ratio was comparable to TORCH for FP-SAL
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.