ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Development and validation of a predictive model for COPD: a multicenter study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death globally and a major public health issue in China. This study aims to develop a COPD predictive model and conduct risk stratification for key indicators not included. Methods: We collected data from inpatients and outpatients with COPD and non-COPD who were hospitalized between January 2018 and December 2022 at three different hospitals. The data were divided into a training set and an internal validation set, using logistic regression to build a COPD predictive model and perform internal validation. External validation of the model was performed using data from two additional units for the period November 2019 to June 2022. Results: A total of 1,056 cases were included: 740 in the training set, 316 in the internal validation set, and 408 in the external validation set. Six risk factors were identified: age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.08), second-hand smoke exposure (OR = 8.27, 95% CI: 2.70-25.34), cough (OR = 23.52, 95% CI: 12.64-43.77), "occasional episodes of wheezing that are mild and do not interfere with sleep or activity" (OR = 6.06, 95% CI: 2.59-14.19), "bouts of wheezing that worsen with movement" (OR = 21.40, 95%CI: 10.32-44.37), and "persistent episodes of wheezing, occurring at rest, unable to lie down" (OR = 10.97, 95% CI: 1.02-118.28). The predictive model equation was: y = -5.920 + 0.047 (age) + 2.113 (smoke exposure) + 3.158 (cough) + 1.801 (wheezing 1) + 3.063 (wheezing 2) + 2.396 (wheezing 3). The model achieved 94.1% accuracy, 98.5% sensitivity, and 89.2% specificity, with an AUC of 0.976 (internal) and 0.691 (external). The critical cut-off value was 0.258. Conclusion: We have successfully developed a model for the diagnosis of COPD. The predictive model equation was: y = -5.920 + 0.047 (age) + 2.113 (smoke exposure) + 3.158 (cough) + 1.801 (wheezing 1) + 3.063 (wheezing 2) + 2.396 (wheezing 3).
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.