Clues to quality of journals
Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016
CC Licencences
Publication Metrics
Home
Deutsch
New EVA Application
Advanced Search
Browse by ...
Publication overview
Statistics (last 5 years)
OA Publications
Submit Publication
Import publication from...
Report missing publication
Contact persons
Help
Text
Endnote (RIS)
BibTeX
Publ. Version/Full Text
DOI
PMC
 |
Closed |
Open Access Green as soon as Postprint is submitted to ZB.
Accuracy of FENO for diagnosing asthma: A systematic review.
Thorax 72, 109-116 (2017)
BACKGROUND: Measurement of FENO might substitute bronchial provocation for diagnosing asthma. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of FENO measurement compared with established reference standard. METHODS: Systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Data sources were Medline, Embase and Scopus up to 29 November 2015. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated using a bivariate model. Additionally, summary receiver-operating characteristic curves were estimated. RESULTS: 26 studies with 4518 participants (median 113) were included. Risk of bias was considered low for six of seven items in five studies and for five items in seven studies. The overall sensitivity in the meta-analysis was 0.65 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.72), the overall specificity 0.82 (0.76 to 0.86), the diagnostic OR 9.23 (6.55 to 13.01) and the area under the curve 0.80 (0.77 to 0.85). In meta-regression analyses, higher cut-off values were associated with increasing specificity (OR 1.46 per 10 ppb increase in cut-off) while there was no association with sensitivity. Sensitivities varied significantly within the different FENO devices, but not specificities. Neither prevalence, age, use of bronchoprovocation in >90% of participants or as exclusive reference standard test, nor risk of bias were significantly associated with diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be a fair accuracy of FENO for making the diagnosis of asthma. The overall specificity was higher than sensitivity, which indicates a higher diagnostic potential for ruling in than for ruling out the diagnosis of asthma.
Impact Factor
Scopus SNIP
Web of Science
Times Cited
Times Cited
Scopus
Cited By
Cited By
Altmetric
8.272
2.257
67
70
Annotations
Special Publikation
Hide on homepage
Publication type
Article: Journal article
Document type
Review
Keywords
Asthma ; Exhaled Airway Markers; Exhaled Nitric-oxide; Exercise-induced Bronchoconstriction; Suspected Asthma; Clinical-practice; Flow Variability; General-practice; Screening Tool; Chronic Cough; Young-adults; Metaanalysis
Language
Publication Year
2017
Prepublished in Year
2016
HGF-reported in Year
2016
ISSN (print) / ISBN
0040-6376
e-ISSN
1468-3296
Journal
Thorax
Quellenangaben
Volume: 72,
Issue: 2,
Pages: 109-116
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group
Publishing Place
London
Reviewing status
Peer reviewed
Institute(s)
Institute of Epidemiology (EPI)
POF-Topic(s)
30503 - Chronic Diseases of the Lung and Allergies
Research field(s)
Genetics and Epidemiology
PSP Element(s)
G-503900-003
WOS ID
WOS:000392630300005
Scopus ID
84978863712
PubMed ID
27388487
Erfassungsdatum
2016-07-21