ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2026
Barometric whole-body plethysmography investigating breed-specific variations in dogs.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Barometric whole-body plethysmography (BWBP) is a non-invasive method for pulmonary function testing in dogs. A significant advantage over other techniques is the possibility to perform measurements in awake and unrestrained animals. Objective: To measure respiratory function parameters using BWBP in three different dog breeds and identify breed-specific differences and measurement variations. Materials and methods: Prospective comparative cross-sectional study including 41 clinically healthy dogs of the breeds Doberman pinscher (17), Parson Russell terrier (14), and French Bulldog (10), all at least 1 year of age. After system calibration, each dog underwent the measurement protocol, which consisted of a 5-min acclimatization period and followed by at least 15 min actual recording. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and analyzed using separate linear models for each lung parameter with breed as a covariate, followed by multiplicity-adjusted pairwise breed comparisons. Additional pairwise tests assessed breed effects with adjustment for age or weight; statistical significance was set at Results: Of 59 dogs recruited, 41 could be included in the final analysis. In the breed comparison, significant differences were identified for the parameters peak expiratory flow (PEF), peak inspiratory flow (PIF), expiratory flow at 50% of tidal volume (EF50), end-expiratory pause (EEP), and the ratio parameter Te/Ti. After adjusting for age and weight as covariates, significant differences among the three breeds persisted. Discussion: The findings support the assumption that breed-specific differences exist for BWBP parameters. However, future studies with larger sample sizes are required to establish reliable reference values, taking breed-specific differences into account.
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.