The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Characterisation of phenotypes based on severity of emphysema in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Airflow limitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is caused by a mixture of small airway disease and emphysema, the relative contributions of which may vary among patients. Phenotypes of COPD classified purely based on severity of emphysema are not well defined and may be different from the classic phenotypes of "pink puffers" and "blue bloaters". METHODS: To characterise clinical phenotypes based on severity of emphysema, 274 subjects with COPD were recruited, excluding those with physician-diagnosed bronchial asthma. For all subjects a detailed interview of disease history and symptoms, quality of life (QOL) measurement, blood sampling, pulmonary function tests before and after inhalation of salbutamol (0.4 mg) and high-resolution CT scanning were performed. RESULTS: Severity of emphysema visually evaluated varied widely even among subjects with the same stage of disease. No significant differences were noted among three groups of subjects classified by severity of emphysema in age, smoking history, chronic bronchitis symptoms, blood eosinophil count, serum IgE level or bronchodilator response. However, subjects with severe emphysema had significantly lower body mass index (BMI) and poorer QOL scores, evaluated using St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), than those with no/mild emphysema (mean (SD) BMI 21.2 (0.5) vs 23.5 (0.3) kg/m(2), respectively; SGRQ total score 40 (3) vs 28 (2), respectively; p<0.001 for both). These characteristics held true even if subjects with the same degree of airflow limitation were chosen. CONCLUSIONS: The severity of emphysema varies widely even in patients with the same stage of COPD, and chronic bronchitis symptoms are equally distributed irrespective of emphysema severity. Patients with the phenotype in which emphysema predominates have lower BMI and poorer health-related QOL.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vestbo, J., Hurd, S. S., Agustí, A. G., Jones, P. W., Vogelmeier, C., Anzueto, A., Barnes, P. J., Fabbri, L. M., Martinez, F. J., Nishimura, M., et al. (2013) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201204-0596pp · Cited by 15,983
Self-citationCelli, B. R., Cote, C. G., Marin, J. M., Casanova, C., Montes de Oca, M., Mendez, R. A., Pinto Plata, V., & Cabral, H. J. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa021322 · Cited by 4,015
Jones, P. W., Quirk, F. H., Baveystock, C. M., & Littlejohns, P. (1992) · American Review of Respiratory Disease · doi:10.1164/ajrccm/145.6.1321 · Cited by 3,035
Cited by
Pharmacological antioxidant strategies as therapeutic interventions for COPD
Rahman, I. (2012) · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Basis of Disease · doi:10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.11.004 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Makita, H., Nasuhara, Y., Nagai, K., Ito, Y., Hasegawa, M., Betsuyaku, T., Onodera, Y., Hizawa, N., Nishimura, M., & the Hokkaido COPD Cohort Study Group
- Venue
- Thorax
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2007-05-25
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 932-937
- ISSN
- 0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2103038852
- Cited by
- 246
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 16.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Characterisation of phenotypes based on severity of emphysema in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thx.2006.072777
- The paper
- Makita, H., Nasuhara, Y., Nagai, K., Ito, Y., Hasegawa, M., Betsuyaku, T., Onodera, Y., Hizawa, N., Nishimura, M., & the Hokkaido COPD Cohort Study Group. (2007). Characterisation of phenotypes based on severity of emphysema in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.2006.072777
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.