Observational studyBMJ open2021
Feasibility and acceptability of breath research in primary care: a prospective, cross-sectional, observational study.
Observational study in BMJ open, 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.
- Article
- Article
- Non-invasive breath testing to detect colorectal cancer: protocol for a multicentre, case-control development and validation study (COBRA2 study).BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Detection of Volatile Organic Compounds as an emerging strategy for Parkinson's disease diagnosis and monitoring.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
- Volatilomic response to targeted cancer therapy in vitro.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Combining Thermal Desorption with Selected Ion Flow Tube Mass Spectrometry for Analyses of Breath Volatile Organic Compounds.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- A Complete Pipeline for Untargeted Urinary Volatolomic Profiling with Sorptive Extraction and Dual Polar and Nonpolar Column Methodologies Coupled with Gas Chromatography Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry.Analytical chemistry · 2023Article
- Breath Testing in the Surgical Setting: Applications, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.European surgical research. Europaische chirurgische Forschung. Recherches chirurgicales europeennes · 2023Review
- The Human Skin Volatolome: A Systematic Review of Untargeted Mass Spectrometry Analysis.Metabolites · 2022Review
- Selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry for targeted analysis of volatile organic compounds in human breath.Nature protocols · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the feasibility and acceptability of breath research in primary care.
designNon-randomised, prospective, mixed-methods cross-sectional observational study.
settingTwenty-six urban primary care practices.
participants1002 patients aged 18-90 years with gastrointestinal symptoms.
main outcome measuresDuring the first 6 months of the study (phase 1), feasibility of patient enrolment using face-to-face, telephone or SMS-messaging (Short Message Service) enrolment strategies, as well as processes for breath testing at local primary care practices, were evaluated. A mixed-method iterative study design was adopted and outcomes evaluated using weekly Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, focus groups and general practitioner (GP) questionnaires.During the second 6 months of the study (phase 2), patient and GP acceptability of the breath test and testing process was assessed using questionnaires. In addition a 'single practice' recruitment model was compared with a 'hub and spoke' centralised recruitment model with regards to enrolment ability and patient acceptability.Throughout the study feasibility of the collection of a large number of breath samples by clinical staff over multiple study sites was evaluated and quantified by the analysis of these samples using mass spectrometry.
results1002 patients were recruited within 192 sampling days. Both 'single practice' and 'hub and spoke' recruitment models were effective with an average of 5.3 and 4.3 patients accrued per day, respectively. The 'hub and spoke' model with SMS messaging was the most efficient combined method of patient accrual. Acceptability of the test was high among both patients and GPs. The methodology for collection, handling and analysis of breath samples was effective, with 95% of samples meeting quality criteria.
conclusionsLarge-scale breath testing in primary care was feasible and acceptable. This study provides a practical framework to guide the design of Phase III trials examining the performance of breath testing in primary care.
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.