ArticleERJ open research2024
Hybrid compared to conventional pulmonary rehabilitation: an equivalence analysis.
Article in ERJ open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimising pulmonary rehabilitation for αERJ open research · 2026Article
- Hybrid pulmonary rehabilitation: alternative models to support centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Feasibility of a real-world digital hybrid pulmonary rehabilitation model using a smartphone app.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- ERS Congress 2024: highlights from the Allied Respiratory Professionals Assembly.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Unraveling the Role of Oxygen Pulse Variability in Endurance Exercise Training in Individuals with COPD: A Novel Approach to Response of Oxygen Pulse and Quality of Life in Pulmonary Rehabilitation.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a well-established intervention for patients with COPD, but access, uptake and completion are low. This retrospective propensity-matched study aimed to analyse equivalence from a hybrid PR modality against conventional PR. Methods: Between 2013 and 2019, 214 patients with COPD with valid baseline physical activity assessments enrolled in conventional PR for three times per week for 3 months. In 2021-2022, 44 patients with COPD enrolled in 3 months of hybrid PR, introducing two providers: once per week in the outpatient centre and two times per week in a primary care setting near the patient's home. All sessions were supervised. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed. Equivalence between both programmes was analysed for exercise capacity with the equivalence margins of ±30 m on the 6-min walk distance (6MWD). Clinical outcomes, accessibility and adherence were compared using t-tests. Results: 44 patients (mean±sd age 67±8 years; forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV Conclusion: Hybrid PR can be offered as an effective alternative to conventional PR, if patients are willing to take up the offer.
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.