SynthesisBMC pulmonary medicine2025
Baseline total lung capacity and all-cause mortality in restrictive pulmonary disorders: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pulmonary medicine, 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.
- Tidal Volume in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Restriction Severity and Prognostic Information beyond Forced Vital Capacity.Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases · 2026Article
- Predictors of Disease Progression in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Under Antifibrotic Therapy: A Retrospective Study.Cureus · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleForced vital capacity (FVC) has been utilized as a surrogate for vital capacity (VC) in monitoring the progression of restrictive pulmonary disorders, particularly in clinical trials of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). A dose-response relationship between decreased FVC and mortality in IPF has also been established. Since 2005, total lung capacity (TLC) has been routinely required to differentiate and diagnose restrictive pulmonary disorders. However, the relationship between changes in TLC change and the risk of mortality remains unclear.
objectivesTo investigate and quantify the relationship between changes in TLC and the risk of mortality in patients with restrictive pulmonary disorders.
methodsThis study employed a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines.
resultsA total of 26 studies were included in the meta-analysis, comprising a combined sample of 16,579 subjects, which included 7,961 females, 4,460 subjects in the relative low TLC group, and 12,119 subjects in the high TLC group. A reduced TLC was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality, as indicated by both unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios. The unadjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) was 1.76 (1.32, 2.35), while the adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) was 1.70 (1.31, 2.20). The risk ratio (RR) estimated from the studies that reported both the number of participants and deaths was RR (95% CI) = 2.01 (1.56, 2.60). The included studies demonstrated significant heterogeneity.
conclusionA low TLC at baseline, in comparison to individuals with relatively higher TLC, may increase the risk of all-cause mortality by at least 42-70% in cases of restrictive pulmonary disorders, although this conclusion is primarily based on observational studies, which carry low to moderate certainty.
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.