ArticleJHLT open2025
Worldwide practices in pulmonary function test reporting after lung transplantation.
Article in JHLT open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spirometry interpretation after lung transplantation (LTx) is complex, requiring a clear understanding of reference values and normal thresholds globally. Abnormal values are typically based on general population reference standards. Methods: In April 2025, a 10-question online survey was conducted among International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation-members to determine the reference values and normal thresholds used worldwide for post-transplant spirometry interpretation. Results: Responses from 58 centers, covering 22,080 lung transplant recipients and representing ∼40% of global transplant activity, were analyzed. Most patients (63%) were followed in the United States or Canada. Global lung initiative (GLI) reference was used for 60%, with 47% using the race-neutral version. The lower limit of normal (LLN) was reported in only 19% of pulmonary function assessments. Regional differences were noted in obstruction definition and impairment grading. Conclusions: While GLI-reference values are widely adopted, 40% of centers have yet to implement them, and LLN remains underutilized in spirometry reporting after LTx.
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.