ArticleBMJ open2024
Comparing performance of primary care clinicians in the interpretation of SPIROmetry with or without Artificial Intelligence Decision support software (SPIRO-AID): a protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05933694 (A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Performance of Primary Care Clinicians in the Interpretation of SPIROmetry With or Without Artificial Intelligence Decision Support Software), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Performance of Primary Care Clinicians in the Interpretation of SPIROmetry With or Without Artificial Intelligence Decision Support Software
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prevalence of COPD in other long-term conditions: a systematic meta review.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Reporting Quality of AI Intervention in Randomized Controlled Trials in Primary Care: Systematic Review and Meta-Epidemiological Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Classification of pulmonary diseases using machine learning and deep learning models on GLI-2012 standardized spirometry features.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Spirometry interpretation in primary care: is there a role for artificial intelligence?ERJ open research · 2025Article
- FEV1/FEV6 Cutoff Points to Avoid False Negatives When Using Portable Devices, PICO-6Journal 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSpirometry is a point-of-care lung function test that helps support the diagnosis and monitoring of chronic lung disease. The quality and interpretation accuracy of spirometry is variable in primary care. This study aims to evaluate whether artificial intelligence (AI) decision support software improves the performance of primary care clinicians in the interpretation of spirometry, against reference standard (expert interpretation). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A parallel, two-group, statistician-blinded, randomised controlled trial of primary care clinicians in the UK, who refer for, or interpret, spirometry. People with specialist training in respiratory medicine to consultant level were excluded. A minimum target of 228 primary care clinician participants will be randomised with a 1:1 allocation to assess fifty de-identified, real-world patient spirometry sessions through an online platform either with (intervention group) or without (control group) AI decision support software report. Outcomes will cover primary care clinicians' spirometry interpretation performance including measures of technical quality assessment, spirometry pattern recognition and diagnostic prediction, compared with reference standard. Clinicians' self-rated confidence in spirometry interpretation will also be evaluated. The primary outcome is the proportion of the 50 spirometry sessions where the participant's preferred diagnosis matches the reference diagnosis. Unpaired t-tests and analysis of covariance will be used to estimate the difference in primary outcome between intervention and control groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been reviewed and given favourable opinion by Health Research Authority Wales (reference: 22/HRA/5023). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, presented at relevant national and international conferences, disseminated through social media, patient and public routes and directly shared with stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05933694.
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.