The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of normal and asthmatic circadian rhythms in peak expiratory flow rate.
Open accessAbstract
A computer technique (cosinor analysis) has been used to evaluate circadian rhythms in airway calibre in normals and asthmatics. Two hundred and twenty-one normal subjects recorded peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) at home four times a day for seven days. Rhythm detection was statistically significant in 145 of them (65.6%) who showed a mean amplitude of 8.3% of individual mean PEFR (+/- SD 5.2%). Amplitude was independent of age, sex, atopy, family history of asthma, and smoking habit. Fifteen of them were also studied three times a day for five days in the laboratory with flow-volume loops. Eleven showed significant PEFR rhythms at home. No single measurement from the flow-volume loop showed periodicity in as many of them but rhythms were now also detected in the other four normal subjects in some components of the loop. Fifty-six asthma patients were studied with a similar protocol of PEFR measurement and compared with the 145 rhythmic normal subjects. Mean phases of the normal and asthmatic rhythms were not significantly different with acrophases (peak of rhythm cycle) at 1557 and 1526 respectively. The mean asthmatic amplitude was, however, significantly greater at 50.9%. Nocturnal asthma, therefore, probably represents an exaggeration of a normal circadian rhythm in airway calibre. The amplitude of the PEFR rhythm is an index of bronchial lability and is thus valuable in monitoring asthma patients. An amplitude of greater than 20% should be a useful screening test for asthma.
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
Cited by
Reddel, H. K., Taylor, D. R., Bateman, E. D., Boulet, L.-P., Boushey, H. A., Busse, W. W., Casale, T. B., Chanez, P., Enright, P. L., Gibson, P. G., et al. (2009) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.200801-060st · Cited by 1,918
Lung Function Testing: Selectionof reference Values and Interpretative Strategies
Miller, A. (1992) · American Review of Respiratory Disease · doi:10.1164/ajrccm/146.5_pt_1.1368b · Cited by 1,426
Symptom variability in patients with severe COPD: a pan-European cross-sectional study
Kessler, R., Partridge, M. R., Miravitlles, M., Cazzola, M., Vogelmeier, C., Leynaud, D., & Ostinelli, J. (2011) · European Respiratory Journal · doi:10.1183/09031936.00051110 · Cited by 388
Quackenboss, J. J., Lebowitz, M. D., & Krzyzanowski, M. (1991) · American Review of Respiratory Disease · doi:10.1164/ajrccm/143.2.323 · Cited by 207
Metadata
- Authors
- Hetzel, M. R., & Clark, T. J.
- Venue
- Thorax
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1980-10-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 732-738
- ISSN
- 0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2108389895
- Cited by
- 524
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.90
- 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: Comparison of normal and asthmatic circadian rhythms in peak expiratory flow rate. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thx.35.10.732
- The paper
- Hetzel, M. R., & Clark, T. J. (1980). Comparison of normal and asthmatic circadian rhythms in peak expiratory flow rate. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thx.35.10.732
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.