ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Performance and Clinical Utility of Various Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Case-Finding Tools.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing the accuracy of CDQ, CAPTURE, LFQ, COPD-PS, COPD-SQ and SCSQ questionnaires for COPD screening in a hospital-facilitated community screening Iranian population.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- A Two-Staged, Risk-Stratified Strategy Combining FEVRespirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2025Observational
- FEV1/FEV6 Cutoff Points to Avoid False Negatives When Using Portable Devices, PICO-6Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: The Costs and Benefits of Case Finding.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2024Article
- Current Progress of COPD Early Detection: Key Points and Novel Strategies.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is frequently underdiagnosed because of the unavailability of spirometers, especially in resource-limited outpatient settings. This study provides real-world evidence to identify optimal approaches for COPD case finding in outpatient settings.
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled individuals who were at risk of COPD (age ≥40 years, ≥10 pack-years, and ≥1 respiratory symptom). Eligible participants were examined using various COPD case-finding tools, namely the COPD Population Screener (COPD-PS) questionnaire, a COPD prediction (P
resultsIn total, 385 participants took part in the study [284 without COPD (73.77%) and 101 with COPD (26.23%)]. The microspirometer exhibited a higher AUC value than did the COPD-PS questionnaire and the P
conclusionThe P
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.