ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2025
A Delphi Consensus Project to Capture Greek Experts' Opinion on the Position of Triple Therapies in COPD: Why, When and to Whom.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2025. 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.
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary care general practitioners regarding COPD inhaler education: a cross-sectional study in Yiwu, China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Delphi Consensus on the Management of COPD Exacerbation Syndrome in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings.Open respiratory archivesArticle
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: In recent years, COPD treatment has become more personalized considering specific patient's characteristics. Aim and Methods: We have performed a DELPHI consensus project to assess the level of consensus among Greek experts on the use of triple therapy in COPD as an initial and follow-up treatment. A three-round Delphi online survey was developed. The questionnaire was developed by a 6-member steering committee, included 54 statements, and divided into 3 domains: (A) triple therapy as initial treatment (divided into subdomains examining the impact of exacerbations based on lung function, bronchodilation reversibility and/or blood eosinophil count, smoking, symptoms, and comorbidities), (B) escalation to triple therapy from dual bronchodilation and (C) de-escalation from triple therapy to dual bronchodilation. The survey was funded by AstraZeneca and was hosted and analysed by an independent external company. Results: Consensus was reached in 84.8%, 63% and 80% of statements for domains A, B and C, respectively. Experts agreed that initial treatment with triple therapy is a reasonable option for specific patients, while escalation from dual bronchodilation to triple therapy could be considered, besides frequent exacerbators, also in patients with a history of one moderate exacerbation, mainly in the presence of marked bronchodilator reversibility or high blood eosinophil count. Finally, there was a consensus that de-escalation from triple therapy to dual bronchodilation was inappropriate in patients who had experienced one moderate exacerbation in the previous year. Conclusion: Although consensus was generated in several statements, panelists failed to reach consensus in many aspects of the use of triple therapy, identifying areas for further research.
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.