Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34248665›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in physiology2021

Application of Machine Learning in Pulmonary Function Assessment Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going?

Paresh C Giri, Anand M Chowdhury, Armando Bedoya, Hengji Chen, Hyun Suk Lee, Patty Lee, Craig Henriquez, Neil R MacIntyre, Yuh-Chin T Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Preparing Allergists to Practice in 2050 Using Artificial Intelligence.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025
    Review
  6. Hyperconcentrated mucus in small airways: a mechanistic model for the pathogenesis of paediatric bronchiectasis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Paresh C GiriDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA, United States.
Anand M ChowdhuryDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.
Armando BedoyaDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.
Hengji ChenDepartment of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.
Hyun Suk LeeHartford HealthCare, Hartford, CT, United States.
Patty LeeDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.
Craig HenriquezDepartment of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.
Neil R MacIntyreDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.
Yuh-Chin T HuangDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analysis of pulmonary function tests (PFTs) is an area where machine learning (ML) may benefit clinicians, researchers, and the patients. PFT measures spirometry, lung volumes, and carbon monoxide diffusion capacity of the lung (DLCO). The results are usually interpreted by the clinicians using discrete numeric data according to published guidelines. PFT interpretations by clinicians, however, are known to have inter-rater variability and the inaccuracy can impact patient care. This variability may be caused by unfamiliarity of the guidelines, lack of training, inadequate understanding of lung physiology, or simply mental lapses. A rules-based automated interpretation system can recapitulate expert's pattern recognition capability and decrease errors. ML can also be used to analyze continuous data or the graphics, including the flow-volume loop, the DLCO and the nitrogen washout curves. These analyses can discover novel physiological biomarkers. In the era of wearables and telehealth, particularly with the COVID-19 pandemic restricting PFTs to be done in the clinical laboratories, ML can also be used to combine mobile spirometry results with an individual's clinical profile to deliver precision medicine. There are, however, hurdles in the development and commercialization of the ML-assisted PFT interpretation programs, including the need for high quality representative data, the existence of different formats for data acquisition and sharing in PFT software by different vendors, and the need for collaboration amongst clinicians, biomedical engineers, and information technologists. Hurdles notwithstanding, the new developments would represent significant advances that could be the future of PFT, the oldest test still in use in clinical medicine.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceDLCOflow-volume looplung volumesmachine learningpulmonary function testspirometry

Identifiers

PMID34248665
PMCPMC8264499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.