ArticleERJ open research2025
Non-zero risk of adverse psychological reactions induced by experimental dyspnoea studies in healthy volunteers: possible ethical implications.
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- SSVEP-based brain-computer interface enabling graded dyspnoea self-report: proof-of-concept study in healthy volunteers.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
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
Background: Experimentally inducing dyspnoea in healthy volunteers is a powerful research tool. Even though this approach is not considered to carry particular risks, dyspnoea occurs in a general context of stress. We hypothesised that experimental dyspnoea could be traumatic in some individuals, with immediate or delayed adverse psychological reactions. Methods: 40 participants (median (interquartile range) age 38.7 (29.7-49.1) years; 20 women) were exposed, in random order, to inspiratory threshold loading (ITL; "excessive breathing effort"; unpleasantness rating 6 (4-7) on a 0-10 scale) and carbon dioxide stimulation with restricted ventilatory response (CO Results: Peritraumatic Distress Inventory (PDI) scores were higher immediately after CO Conclusions: Although no severe situations were encountered, this study highlights the need for caution when designing experimental dyspnoea studies, particularly when involving individuals with high trait anxiety.
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.