Observational studyBMJ open respiratory research2025
Impact of bronchitis variability on outcomes of COPD.
Observational study in BMJ open respiratory research, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of serial bronchitic status over two consecutive years on clinical outcomes, including frequency of exacerbation and lung function decline rate.
methodsWe analysed data from 1265 participants enrolled in the Korea COPD Subgroup Study, a nationwide prospective observational chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cohort. Bronchitic status was determined using subquestionnaires of the COPD Assessment Test at baseline and after 1 year, classifying patients into three serial bronchitic groups of persistently not bronchitic (NB), intermittently bronchitic (IB) and chronic bronchitis (CB). Annualised exacerbation rates and longitudinal lung function decline rates were analysed.
resultsThe NB group consisted of 873 individuals, the IB group contained 272 and the CB group included 120. The analysis of baseline demographics showed a greater prevalence of current smokers in the CB and IB groups compared with the NB group. Patients with CB exhibited the worst baseline symptoms and lung function, while those with IB had worse clinical features compared with those with persistently NB. Patients with CB had the highest rate of moderate-to-severe exacerbations, followed by IB, compared with persistently NB. No significant differences in forced expiratory volume in 1 s or forced vital capacity decline rates were observed among the groups.
conclusionsPatients with CB and IB exhibit a greater risk of exacerbations than those with NB, whereas lung function decline rates did not significantly differ between groups.
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.