ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2024
Oscillometry in Asthma: Respiratory Modeling and Analysis in Occupational and Work-Exacerbated Phenotypes.
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Respiratory mechanics: modelling, measurement and clinical applications-a review.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Asthma onset or worsening of the disease in adulthood may be associated with occupational asthma (OA) or work-exacerbated asthma (WEA). Oscillometry and respiratory modeling offer insight into the pathophysiology and contribute to the early diagnosis of respiratory abnormalities. Purpose: This study aims to compare the changes due to OA and WEA and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of this method. Patients and Methods: Ninety-nine volunteers were evaluated: 33 in the control group, 33 in the OA group, and 33 in the WEA group. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) was used to describe diagnostic accuracy. Results: Oscillometric analysis showed increased resistance at 4 hz (R4, p<0.001), 20 hz (R20, p<0.05), R4-R20 (p<0.0001), and respiratory work (p<0.001). Similar analysis showed reductions in dynamic compliance (p<0.001) and ventilation homogeneity, as evaluated by resonance frequency (Fr, p<0.0001) and reactance area (p<0.0001). Respiratory modeling showed increased peripheral resistance (p<0.0001), hysteresivity (p<0.0001), and damping (p<0.0001). No significant changes were observed comparing OA with WEA in any parameter. For OA, the diagnostic accuracy analyses showed Fr as the most accurate among oscillometric parameters (AUC=0.938), while the most accurate from respiratory modeling was hysteresivity (AUC=0.991). A similar analysis for WEA also showed that Fr was the most accurate among traditional parameters (AUC=0.972), and hysteresivity was the most accurate from modeling (AUC=0.987). The evaluation of differential diagnosis showed low accuracy. Conclusion: Oscillometry and modeling have advanced our understanding of respiratory abnormalities in OA and WEA. Furthermore, our study presents evidence suggesting that these models could aid in the early diagnosis of these diseases. Respiratory oscillometry examinations necessitate only tidal breathing and are straightforward to conduct. Collectively, these practical considerations, coupled with the findings of our study, indicate that respiratory oscillometry in conjunction with respiratory modeling, may enhance lung function assessments in OA and WEA.
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.