ArticleERJ open research2025
COMPAIR: a comparison of directly supervised clinic
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participant Experience, Acceptability and Feasibility of Virtual and Digitally Supported Visits in a Phase IIa COPD Trial.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Innovation in technologies for monitoring lung function in patients with respiratory disease.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Our objectives were to compare directly supervised in clinic spirometry (DSCS) with virtually supervised at home spirometry (VSHS), assess the utility of artificial intelligence (AI) over-reading and evaluate patients' views of VSHS. Methods: A multicentre, prospective, 8-day study was conducted in adult patients with physician-diagnosed asthma or COPD from UK primary/secondary care. Spirometry (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV Results: 68 participants were included (asthma: n=47; COPD: n=21). There was excellent concordance between HCP-over-read DSCS (Day 1) and VSHS (Day 2) as indicated by intraclass correlation coefficients for FEV Conclusions: VSHS with the NuvoAir spirometer and ArtiQ.QC over-reading offers reliable and consistent measures of lung function for research purposes and potential clinical application in a population of patients with asthma or COPD. VSHS coupled with AI over-read allows spirometry to be performed at a more convenient location for patients while maintaining high-quality results, comparable to clinic-based spirometry.
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.