Trial reportJAMA surgery2023
Clinical Implications of Removing Race-Corrected Pulmonary Function Tests for African American Patients Requiring Surgery for Lung Cancer.
Trial report in JAMA surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Recommendation to Reality: Implementing Global Lung Initiative (GLI) Global Amid Uncertainty.CHEST pulmonary · 2026Article
- Race-neutral spirometry reclassification in self-identified Black and White patients.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Current Practices and Preferences Regarding Race and Spirometry Interpretation: A National Survey.CHEST pulmonary · 2026Article
- The Effect of Pulmonary Function Test Reference Equations on Classification of Restrictive Lung Disease Severity in Systemic Sclerosis.Arthritis care & research · 2026Article
- Year in Review: Pulmonary Function Testing.Respiratory care · 2025Review
- Inflammatory lung diseases: a clinical and scientific review of the latest advances and challenges.Pharmacological reports : PR · 2025Review
- How I Teach Racial Categorization in Reference Equations Used to Interpret Spirometry.ATS scholar · 2025Article
- Examining discordance in spirometry reference equations: A retrospective study.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- Clinical Algorithms and the Legacy of Race-Based Correction: Historical Errors, Contemporary Revisions and Equity-Oriented Methodologies for Epidemiologists.Clinical epidemiology · 2025Review
- Guidance for unbiased predictive information for healthcare decision-making and equity (GUIDE): considerations when race may be a prognostic factor.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Rethinking the Role of Race in Lung Function: The Shift to Race-Neutral Spirometry Interpretation.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2024Article
- Framing the Consequences of Implementing Race-Neutral Interpretation of Spirometry.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2024Article
- The Impact of Changing Race-Specific Equations for Lung Function Tests among Veterans with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2024Article
- Race adjustments in clinical algorithms can help correct for racial disparities in data quality.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Article
- Use of Race-Specific Equations in Pulmonary Function Tests Impedes Potential Eligibility for Care and Treatment of Pulmonary Fibrosis.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2024Observational
- Implications of Race Adjustment in Lung-Function Equations.The New England journal of medicine · 2024Article
- "Horses for courses" computed tomography or predicted total lung capacity for size matching in lung transplantation.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2024Article
- Reply: Disparities in Lung Transplantation: Metrics Matter.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2024Article
- Reply to: [Letter to the Editor].Health equity · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Removal of race correction in pulmonary function tests (PFTs) is a priority, given that race correction inappropriately conflates race, a social construct, with biological differences and falsely assumes worse lung function in African American than White individuals. However, the impact of decorrecting PFTs for African American patients with lung cancer is unknown. Objectives: To identify how many hospitals providing lung cancer surgery use race correction, examine the association of race correction with predicted lung function, and test the effect of decorrection on surgeons' treatment recommendations. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this quality improvement study, hospitals participating in a statewide quality collaborative were contacted to determine use of race correction in PFTs. For hospitals performing race correction, percent predicted preoperative and postoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was calculated for African American patients who underwent lung cancer resection between January 1, 2015, and September 31, 2022, using race-corrected and race-neutral equations. US cardiothoracic surgeons were then randomized to receive 1 clinical vignette that differed by the use of Global Lung Function Initiative equations for (1) African American patients (percent predicted postoperative FEV1, 49%), (2) other race or multiracial patients (percent predicted postoperative FEV1, 45%), and (3) race-neutral patients (percent predicted postoperative FEV1, 42%). Main Outcomes and Measures: Number of hospitals using race correction in PFTs, change in preoperative and postoperative FEV1 estimates based on race-neutral or race-corrected equations, and surgeon treatment recommendations for clinical vignettes. Results: A total of 515 African American patients (308 [59.8%] female; mean [SD] age, 66.2 [9.4] years) were included in the study. Fifteen of the 16 hospitals (93.8%) performing lung cancer resection for African American patients during the study period reported using race correction, which corresponds to 473 African American patients (91.8%) having race-corrected PFTs. Among these patients, the percent predicted preoperative FEV1 and postoperative FEV1 would have decreased by 9.2% (95% CI, -9.0% to -9.5%; P < .001) and 7.6% (95% CI, -7.3% to -7.9%; P < .001), respectively, if race-neutral equations had been used. A total of 225 surgeons (194 male [87.8%]; mean [SD] time in practice, 19.4 [11.3] years) were successfully randomized and completed the vignette items regarding risk perception and treatment outcomes (76% completion rate). Surgeons randomized to the vignette with African American race-corrected PFTs were more likely to recommend lobectomy (79.2%; 95% CI, 69.8%-88.5%) compared with surgeons randomized to the other race or multiracial-corrected (61.7%; 95% CI, 51.1%-72.3%; P = .02) or race-neutral PFTs (52.8%; 95% CI, 41.2%-64.3%; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Given the findings of this quality improvement study, surgeons should be aware of changes in PFT testing because removal of race correction PFTs may change surgeons' treatment decisions and potentially worsen existing disparities in receipt of lung cancer surgery among African American 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.