Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008133

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008133
suck pdf from google scholar
C4606431!4606431!26450427
unlimited free pdf from europmc26450427    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi


Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534

Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 215.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
pmid26450427      BMJ+Open 2015 ; 5 (10): ä
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Diagnostic accuracy of screening tests for COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis #MMPMID26450427
  • Haroon S; Jordan R; Takwoingi Y; Adab P
  • BMJ Open 2015[]; 5 (10): ä PMID26450427show ga
  • Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is widely underdiagnosed. A number of studies have evaluated the accuracy of screening tests for COPD, but their findings have not been formally summarised. We therefore sought to determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of such screening tests in primary care. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of screening tests for COPD confirmed by spirometry in primary care. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and other bibliographic databases from 1997 to 2013 for diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated 1 or more index tests in primary care among individuals aged ?35?years with no prior diagnosis of COPD. Bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity was performed where appropriate. Methodological quality was assessed independently by 2 reviewers using the QUADAS-2 tool. Results: 10 studies were included. 8 assessed screening questionnaires (the COPD Diagnostic Questionnaire (CDQ) was the most evaluated, n=4), 4 assessed handheld flow meters (eg, COPD-6) and 1 assessed their combination. Among ever smokers, the CDQ (score threshold ?19.5; n=4) had a pooled sensitivity of 64.5% (95% CI 59.9% to 68.8%) and specificity of 65.2% (52.9% to 75.8%), and handheld flow meters (n=3) had a sensitivity of 79.9% (95% CI 74.2% to 84.7%) and specificity of 84.4% (68.9% to 93.0%). Inadequate blinding between index tests and spirometry was the main risk of bias. Conclusions: Handheld flow meters demonstrated higher test accuracy than the CDQ for COPD screening in primary care. The choice of alternative screening tests within whole screening programmes should now be fully evaluated. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42012002074.
  • ä


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box