ArticlePhysical therapy research2025
Comparison of Six-minute Walk Test Parameters by Severity of Idiopathic and Non-idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.
Article in Physical therapy 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe 6-minute walk test (6MWT) is generally used to evaluate endurance in interstitial lung disease (ILD). In ILD, treatment efficacy differs between patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and those with non-idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (non-IPF), and the clinical profile varies according to disease severity. This study compared 6MWT parameters by severity of illness in patients with IPF and non-IPF.
methodsThe participants were hospitalized patients with ILD and either IPF (n = 20) or non-IPF (n = 25). To compare IPF and non-IPF by severity, patients were classified using the gender-age-physiology (GAP) index as having GAP stage I (i.e., mild) or GAP stage II/III (i.e., moderate to severe). The evaluation parameters were the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), minimum percutaneous oxygen saturation (SpO
resultsThe minimum SpO
conclusionsPatients with mild IPF were more prone to hypoxemia, while in moderate-to-severe cases, we observed no significant hypoxemia- or endurance-related differences between IPF and non-IPF patients. This study highlights the importance of severity-based evaluation, particularly in guiding individualized rehabilitation and risk management for patients with IPF.
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.