ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Restriction with Normal Spirometry: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Though a normal forced vital capacity (FVC) is typically thought to imply the absence of restriction, recent data suggest that restriction may in fact be common among patients with normal spirometry. However, the clinical significance of restriction with normal spirometry is unknown. Research Question: What clinical characteristics and outcomes are associated with restriction with normal spirometry? Study Design and Methods: We interpreted pulmonary function tests (PFTs) with both static and dynamic lung volume measurements performed between 2012 and 2025 at four pulmonary diagnostic labs. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify clinical characteristics associated with restriction among patients with normal spirometry and used a Cox proportional hazards model to assess the association of restriction with survival, adjusting for age, sex, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV Results: We interpreted 83,886 PFTs from 47,597 patients (mean age 58.8 years, 59.8% female, 63.6% White). The prevalence of restriction among patients with normal spirometry was 25.7% Restriction with normal spirometry was more likely in older patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.01 per year, 95% CI 1.01-1.01), in non-White patients (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26-1.41), and in patients with a diagnosis (aOR 3.65, 95% CI 3.43-3.88) or radiographic evidence (aOR 3.02, 95% CI 2.79-3.28) of interstitial lung disease (ILD). Restriction with normal spirometry was less likely among female patients (aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.60-0.67), and patients with a diagnosis (0.74, 95% CI 0.67-0.82) or radiographic evidence (aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89) of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Restriction with normal spirometry was associated with increased all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.45, 95% CI 1.34-1.57) as compared to normal spirometry without restriction. Interpretation: Restriction with normal spirometry is associated with ILD and with decreased survival. Clinically significant ventilatory impairments are common in patients with normal spirometry.
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.