ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2025
A Brief and Effective Questionnaire for COPD Screening in High-Altitude Areas.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To develop a reliable screening questionnaire for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) for primary health care institutions in high-altitude areas. Patients and Methods: This was a large cross-sectional study. The study included individuals who resided at an altitude of more than 2100 meters, were aged 35 years or older. The data were randomly divided into a development set and a validation set at a ratio of 7:3. Single-factor and multifactor logistic regression equations were employed to identify pertinent variables and construct a scoring system. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, area under the curve (AUC), positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were used to evaluate the discriminative ability of the questionnaire. Results: A total of 2909 individuals were included in this study, including 1304 males (44.83%), with a median age of 47.00 (41.00-55.00) years. A multivariate analysis of the development set revealed that five variables (age, history of pulmonary tuberculosis, smoking status, household air pollution exposure and CPOD Assessment Test (CAT) score) were significantly correlated with COPD. A scoring system was constructed on the basis of these findings. The AUC for the model in the development set was 0.714, whereas that for the validation set was 0.726. ROC analysis indicated that the optimal diagnostic cutoff value for the score was 22 points, with a sensitivity of 85.0% and a specificity of 48.4%. The results indicated that the sensitivity of the model was the highest (87.3%) at altitudes between 2100 and 3000 meters, whereas the specificity was the highest (80.9%) at altitudes >4000 meters. The conclusions were essentially consistent when the lower limit of normal (LLN) was used to verify the values in different altitude areas. Conclusion: The COPD screening questionnaire effectively screens COPD in high-altitude primary healthcare settings.
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.