ArticleJournal of global health2025
Machine learning-assisted construction of COPD self-evaluation questionnaire (COPD-EQ): a national multicentre study in China.
Article in Journal of global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic evaluations of screening and case-finding for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): a systematic review.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Identification and mechanism analysis of biomarkers related to butyrate metabolism in COVID-19 patients.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Approximately 70% of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is underdiagnosed worldwide. We aimed to develop and validate a COPD self-evaluation questionnaire (COPD-EQ) that is better suited for COPD screening in China. Methods: We developed a primary version of COPD-EQ based on the Delphi method. Then, we conducted a nationwide multicentre prospective to validate our novel COPD-EQ screening ability. To improve the screening ability of COPD-EQ, we used a series of machine learning (ML)-based methods, including logistic regression, XgBoost, LightGBM, and CatBoost. These models were developed and then evaluated on a random 3:1 train/test split. Results: Through the Delphi approach, we developed the primary version of COPD-EQ with nine items. In the following prospective multicentre study, we recruited 1824 outpatients from 12 sites, of whom 404 (22.1%) were diagnosed with COPD. After the score assignment assisted by ML models and the Shapley Additive Explanation method, six of nine items were retained for a briefer version of COPD-EQ. The scoring-based method achieves an AUC score of 0.734 at a threshold of 4.0. Finally, a novel six-item COPD-EQ questionnaire was developed. Conclusions: The COPD-EQ questionnaire was validated to be reliable and accurate in COPD screening for the Chinese population. The ML model can further improve the questionnaire's screening ability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.