ArticleERJ open research2020
No gender-related bias in COPD diagnosis and treatment in Sweden: a randomised, controlled, case-based trial.
Article in ERJ open research, 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.
- Sex Differences in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Implications for Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Sex-differences in COPD: from biological mechanisms to therapeutic considerations.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCOPD is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The prevalence, morbidity and mortality of COPD among females have increased. Previous studies indicate a possible gender bias in the diagnosis and management of COPD. The present study aims to determine if there is gender bias in the management of COPD in Sweden.
methodsThis was a double-blind, randomised (1:1), controlled, parallel-group, web-based trial using the hypothetical case scenario of a former smoker (40 pack-years and quit smoking 3 years ago) who was male or female. The participants were blind to the randomisation and the purpose of the trial. The case progressively revealed more information with associated questions on how the physician would manage the patient. Study participants chose from a list of tests and treatments at each step of the case scenario.
resultsIn total, 134 physicians were randomised to a male (n=62) or a female (n=72) case. There was no difference in initial diagnosis (61 (98%) male cases and 70 (97%) female cases diagnosed with COPD) and planned diagnostic procedures between the male and female cases. Spirometry was chosen by all the physicians as one of the requested diagnostic tests. The management of the hypothetical COPD case did not differ by sex of the responding physician.
conclusionIn Sweden, diagnosis and management of a hypothetical patient with COPD did not differ by the gender of the patient or physician.
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.