ArticleNarra J2024
Comparative analysis between PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaires for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) screening in smokers.
Article in Narra J, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive performance of the PUMA questionnaire as an opportunistic COPD case-finding tool in Singapore primary care.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Observational
- CAPTURE and PUMA as Case-Finding Tools in Patients at Risk of COPD-A Multicenter Mexican Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) presents a significant global challenge, impacting health systems, economies, and societies. Its prevalence is anticipated to rise owing to an aging demographic. Although the PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaires are available for COPD screening, their comparative effectiveness has not been studied in Indonesia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaires as screening tools for COPD among smokers. A cross-sectional study was conducted at Universitas Sumatera Utara Hospital and H. Adam Malik General Hospital, Medan, Indonesia, from December 2022 to February 2023. Smokers aged over 40 or above with a history of smoking more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime and no previous COPD diagnosis were included in the study. To collect the responses to PUMA and CAPTURE questionnaire, face-to-face interviews were conducted, followed by a spirometry test. A total of 76 smokers were included in the study; the predominant age group was 51-60 years (36.8%), with the majority being male (81.6%). Most participants began smoking at ages 15-20 years (65.8%) and had been smoking for 20-30 years (36.8%) at a moderate intensity (44.8%). Spirometry tests indicated obstructive patterns in 50 participants, with 17 classified as severe obstruction. At a cut-off score of ≥6, the PUMA questionnaire yielded a sensitivity of 72.55% and a specificity of 84%. In contrast, the CAPTURE questionnaire, with a cut-off score of ≥4, exhibited a sensitivity of 70.83% and a specificity of 64.29%. These results imply that the PUMA questionnaire could be more efficient in COPD screening compared to the CAPTURE questionnaire.
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.