ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2026
A cohort study of forced vital capacity, airway obstruction, and survival in the multinational Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease study.
Article in International journal of epidemiology, 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the USA, higher forced vital capacity (FVC) is linked with longer survival, and FVC is associated with survival independently of ethnicity. The implications for the low FVC values in parts of Asia and Africa are unknown.
methodsWe used data from 16 sites of the multinational Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease (BOLD) study that completed follow-up of participants between 2019 and 2021 and reported at least five deaths between baseline and follow-up. We assessed the association of mortality with FVC and Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1)/FVC ratio within each site using Cox proportional hazards models. These models were adjusted for age, smoking, height, and weight. Effect estimates from all sites were combined using meta-analysis. Systematic regional differences were investigated.
resultsOf 9927 study participants with follow-up data, 1120 (11.3%) had died [mean follow-up = 8.7 years, standard deviation (SD) = 3.3 years]. Baseline post-bronchodilator FVC and FEV1/FVC were inversely associated with mortality. When both FVC and FEV1/FVC were mutually adjusted for each other, the decreased mortality rates were more pronounced for each SD higher FVC at baseline [44% (95% confidence interval (CI): 25%, 58%) for men and 28% (95% CI: 11%, 41%) for women] than for FEV1/FVC at baseline [14% (95% CI: 8%, 20%) for men and 7% (95% CI: -10%, 21%) for women]. The probability of true regional differences was low.
conclusionsPeople with a higher FVC adjusted for age, sex, and height have a longer survival. Regional adjustments to lung function standards are inappropriate when assessing prognosis.
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.