ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
The Accuracy of a Screening Tool in Epidemiological Studies-An Example of Exhaled Nitric Oxide in Paediatric Asthma.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide Testing for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma: a Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnostic tests are widely used in medicine, especially in the clinical setting. The doctor's decision regarding the treatment process is mostly based on the result of the diagnostic test. The value of the test is expressed by its accuracy. It is easier to verify the accuracy of a diagnostic test in a clinical setting in comparison to an epidemiological setting. Moreover, a very good test may not work in epidemiological settings in the same effective way as in a clinical setting, especially because the accuracy is affected by the prevalence of the disease. The aim of the study is to assess the accuracy of FeNO measurement in different respiratory disorders or symptoms, including their prevalence, in a childhood population. The secondary aim is to suggest the optimal FeNO cut-off for epidemiological screening for respiratory diseases and symptoms.
methodsThe cross-sectional study included 447 children (50.8% boys and 49.2% girls) aged 6-9 years. An adapted version of the ISAAC questionnaire was used for the assessment of the respiratory status. FeNO was measured with an electrochemical device (Niox Mino) according to ERS/ATS recommendations. For interpretation, the FeNO cut-off values of 20 parts per billion (ppb), 25 ppb and 35 ppb were applied taking the real-life prevalence of the disease or symptoms into consideration and also for simulated prevalences of 20%, 30%, 40%, 50% for the interpretation of the accuracy of the test. The accuracy was calculated according to the following formula: Accuracy = (Prevalence) (Sensitivity) + (1- Prevalence) (Specificity). The area under the curve was calculated based on logistic regression.
resultsFor all respiratory outcomes, FeNO accuracy decreased with increasing prevalence, and in general the area under the curve (AUC) was low. The highest FeNO accuracy was found for any asthma diagnosis (with possible coexisting diseases/symptoms), i.e., 78.6%, 92.8% and 88.5% for FeNO cut-offs >19 ppb, >24 ppb and >34 ppb, respectively. The AUC was 0.628. For the same FeNO cut-offs, the accuracy of an asthma diagnosis without any coexisting diseases and symptoms was 81.2%, 87.5%, 92.9%, respectively, with an AUC of 0.757.
conclusionFeNO accuracy decreases with increasing prevalence of the respiratory disease and symptoms. The best accuracy for the FeNO cut-off in the screening of asthma for epidemiological purposes is 35 ppb. For isolated asthma, the best accuracy for FeNO was 92.9%.
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.