ReviewChest2023
Towards a Race-Neutral System of Pulmonary Function Test Results Interpretation.
Review in Chest, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Race-neutral spirometry reclassification in self-identified Black and White patients.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Author Reply: 'Is lung function in a race against time?'Experimental physiology · 2026Article
- Racial, Ethnic, Sex, and Gender Equity for Inclusive Interstitial Lung Disease Research: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Teaching Internal Medicine Residents to Critically Appraise the Role of Race in Pulmonary Function Testing.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2025Article
- Rethinking the Role of Race in Lung Function: The Shift to Race-Neutral Spirometry Interpretation.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2024Article
- Strategies for the Management of a Pulmonary Function Laboratory.CHEST pulmonary · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
It has been observed widely that, on average, Black individuals in the United States have lower FVC than White individuals, which is thought to reflect a combination of genetic, environmental, and socioeconomic factors that are difficult to disentangle. Debate therefore persists even after the American Thoracic Society's 2023 guidelines recommending race-neutral pulmonary function test (PFT) result interpretation strategies. Advocates of race-based PFT results interpretation argue that it allows for more precise measurement and will minimize disease misclassification. In contrast, recent studies have shown that low lung function in Black patients has clinical consequences. Furthermore, the use of race-based algorithms in medicine in general is increasingly being questioned for its risk of perpetuating structural health care disparities. Given these concerns, we believe it is time to adopt a race-neutral approach, but note that more research is urgently needed to understand how race-neutral approaches impact PFT results interpretation, clinical decision-making, and patient outcomes. In this brief case-based discussion, we offer a few examples of how a race-neutral PFT results interpretation strategy will impact individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups at different scenarios and stages of life.
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.