SynthesisTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease
Clinimetric analysis of outcome measures for airway clearance in people with cystic fibrosis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Iron Supplementation in Anemic Patients with Cystic Fibrosis: Effects on Hematologic, Clinical, and Pulmonary Outcomes.Tanaffos · 2025Article
- Exercise as an Airway Clearance Technique in people with Cystic Fibrosis (ExACT-CF): rationale and study protocol for a randomised pilot trial.NIHR open research · 2022Article
- Forced oscillometry technique in the assessment of adults with cystic fibrosis treated for a pulmonary exacerbation, a pilot feasibility study.Chronic respiratory diseaseArticle
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAirway clearance techniques (ACTs) are integral to cystic fibrosis (CF) management. However, there is no consensus as to which outcome measures (OMs) are best for assessing ACT efficacy.
objectivesTo summarise OMs that have been assessed for their clinimetric properties (including validity, feasibility, reliability, and reproducibility) within the context of ACT research in CF. DESIGN AND
methodsA systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA) standards. Any parallel or cross-over randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigating outcome measures for ACT in the CF population were eligible for inclusion. The search was performed in five medical databases, clinicaltrials.gov, and abstracts from international CF conferences. The authors planned to independently assess study quality and risk of bias using the
resultsNo completed RCTs from the 187 studies identified met inclusion criteria for the primary or post hoc secondary objective. Two ongoing trials were identified. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionThis empty systematic review highlights that high-quality RCTs are urgently needed to investigate and validate the clinimetric properties of OMs used to assess ACT efficacy. With the changing demographics of CF combined with the introduction of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapies, an accurate assessment of the current benefit of ACT or the effect of ACT withdrawal is a high priority for clinical practice and future research; OMs which have been validated for this purpose are essential. REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42020206033).
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.