ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Products, Performance, and Technological Development of Ambulatory Oxygen Therapy Devices: Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. 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.
- Effect of low-flow oxygen therapy on 6 minute walk test in pulmonary arterial hypertension and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a randomized non-inferiority crossover trial.European heart journal open · 2026Article
- The future of home oxygen therapy.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmbulatory oxygen therapy is prescribed for patients with chronic lung diseases who experience exertional hypoxemia. However, available devices may not adequately meet user requirements, and their performance characteristics are heterogeneous.
objectiveThis study aims to identify devices available for delivery of ambulatory oxygen therapy, the technologies that they use to generate oxygen, the performance characteristics of each device, and the development status.
methodsWe used medical and engineering databases to identify peer-reviewed papers (eg, MEDLINE, IEEE). Gray literature was used to identify additional descriptions of ambulatory oxygen devices in military medicine, space exploration, or patents. The last search was conducted in September 2025. Documents that described a device that can deliver oxygen in an ambulatory context (defined as weighing less than 10 kg) and were written in English were included. Search results were screened for inclusion by 2 independent reviewers. Data were synthesized by descriptively mapping the performance of each product, the technology used, and the development status of emerging technologies.
resultsFrom 9702 records identified, a total of 166 met eligibility criteria (106 scientific publications and 60 gray literature). We identified 33 portable oxygen concentrators (POCs; 29 commercially available), 10 oxygen cylinders, and 6 portable liquid oxygen (LOX) devices. The POC products showed a trade-off between portability and oxygen delivery capacity (maximum flow rate ranging from 2.0 to 6.0 L/min; device weight ranging from 1.0 to 9.1 kg). Pressure swing adsorption with zeolite was the most common oxygen generation technology in POCs on the market. The mean maximum continuous operating time of POCs was 3.8 hours. Two prototype POCs (maximum flow rate of 4-6 L/min and device weight of 8-9 kg) were developed for space exploration using modified adsorbents. LOX devices were the lightest and had the longest continuous operating time. Innovations in delivery included the downsizing of a POC by using nanozeolite as an adsorbent and pulse oximeter oxygen saturation (SpO
conclusionsThis scoping review is the first study to integrate medical, engineering, and gray literature on ambulatory oxygen devices and their development. Although prior literature has narratively explained the products and technologies, no previous research has systematically investigated them. This review showed that POCs available to consumers may not meet the needs of patients in terms of flow rate, portability, and operating time. LOX devices offered superior performance but are limited by high costs. Limitations of this review include the difficulty of comparing product performance across oxygen delivery settings and that the records were largely obtained from English-language sources. Innovation in ambulatory oxygen technology has been limited over the past decade, highlighting urgent need for research and development of new lightweight devices with higher oxygen delivery.
trial registrationOSF Registries 10.17605/OSF.IO/QS7FX; https://osf.io/qs7fx.
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.