ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2026
Derivation and validation of a pre-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC threshold for point-of-care diagnosis triage of COPD in primary care: a multi-cohort population-based study.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Post-bronchodilator (BD) spirometry is underused in primary care settings, limiting COPD diagnosis. This study aimed to derive and validate pre-BD thresholds that safely rule in COPD and enable immediate diagnosis. Methods: We derived pre-BD FEV1/FVC thresholds using a nationally representative derivation dataset (CPHS, n = 6360 with pre-BD ratio <0.7), with cross-sectional external validation in the China Kadoorie Biobank (CKB, n = 1890) and longitudinal validation in a national screening cohort (NSC, n = 7620 with 1-year follow-up). The optimal threshold was selected based on positive predictive value (PPV) for post-BD FEV1/FVC <0.7. One-year longitudinal follow-up assessed diagnostic stability and prognostic value. Findings: A pre-BD threshold of 0.56 was identified, yielding a PPV of 0.953 (95% CI, 0.939-0.965) in derivation set and 0.919 (95% CI, 0.875-0.940) in the CKB validation set. In subgroups with higher prior probability (male, age >60 years, smoking, and with respiratory symptoms), the PPV was further increased. At one-year follow-up in the NSC, 86.9% of participants with baseline pre-BD <0.56 still met the post-BD COPD criteria. Patients below 0.56 had significantly higher risks of acute exacerbation (OR, 3.34; 95% CI, 2.55-4.37) and respiratory hospitalization (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 2.65-4.42). An alternative threshold of 0.62 gave a PPV of 0.891 (95% CI, 0.866-0.913) in CKB and allowed 33.8%-49.0% of participants across cohorts to bypass post-BD testing. Interpretation: A pre-BD FEV1/FVC threshold of 0.56 effectively "rules-in" COPD in primary care and identifies patients with poor prognosis. The alternative threshold of 0.62 offers a practical option to further reduce post-BD testing while maintaining an acceptable PPV. Both thresholds facilitate pragmatic triage and early diagnosis without routine post-BD testing. Funding: This work was funded by National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding (2025-NHLHCRF-JBGS-B-WZ-18), Noncommunicable Chronic Diseases-National Science and Technology Major Project (2023ZD0506003, 2023ZD0506306, 2023ZD0510101, 2023ZD0510100), Social Development Project of Yunnan Province (202403AC100006) and Beijing Nova Program (20250484849).
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.