Trial reportPneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany)2022
[Validation study of MEP questionnaire for simplified detection of exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease].
Trial report in Pneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Use of long-acting triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in practice: The ELETHON physicians' survey].Pneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany) · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Questionnaire "Monitoring of Exacerbation Probability" (MEP) provides a novel simple tool to assist detection and semiquantitative numerical documentation of exacerbation (ECOPD) in daily routine. In a prospective multi-center trial involving 3751 visits of 810 patients in 21 centers, MEP was evaluated and compared to the application of the EXACT-Pro questionnaire under real world conditions. The population of COPD patients included in this study is a typical COPD population demographically and clinically. Defining a MEP score of one or more as a positive test result, we found a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 66%. Additionally, MEP results correlated clearly with EXACT-Pro results. This qualifies the MEP questionnaire as a valid tool for the detection of ECOPD and longitudinal characterization of COPD patients.
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.