ArticleRespiratory medicine2021
Spirometry quality predictors in a large multistate prospective study.
Article in Respiratory medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of an Intelligent Clinical Decision Support System for Spirometry Quality Control.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The association between spirometry measurement quality, cognitive function, and mortality.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThe Gulf Long-Term Follow-up (GuLF) Study is a prospective cohort study of health effects associated with oil spill response and clean-up following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Disaster (DWH). As part of the study, spirometry testing of lung function was carried out in home visits across multiple states. Few studies have described factors associated with spirometry test failure in field-based settings.
objectiveOur objective was to identify what factors, if any, predict test failure among GuLF Study participants who completed spirometry testing in a non-traditional setting.
methodsTrained examiners administered spirometry (May 2011-May 2013) to 10,019 participants living in US Gulf States (LA, MS, TX, AL, FL) using an Easy-on ultrasonic spirometer. We applied American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society quality criteria to determine quality test failure and identified factors predictive of failure using both a Stepwise and a LASSO model. We calculated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations of selected factors with test failure.
resultsAmong GuLF Study participants who conducted spirometry, self-reported African American/Black participants (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.23,1.56); men (OR:1.61, 95% CI: 1.41,1.83); and those making less than $20,000 per year (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.26,1.67) were more likely to fail quality testing, while those who were obese were less likely to fail (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.42,0.89).
conclusionField-based studies involving spirometry should identify and account for participant factors that may influence test failure. Coaching that is tailored to those less likely to have experience with spirometry may help reduce test failure rates.
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.