Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 214

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantitative Computed Tomography Measures of Emphysema and Airway Wall Thickness Are Related to Respiratory Symptoms

Grydeland, Thomas B., Dirksen, Asger, Coxson, Harvey O., Eagan, Tomas M. L., Thorsen, Einar, Pillai, Sreekumar G., Sharma, Sanjay, Eide, Geir Egil, Gulsvik, Amund, Bakke, Per S.·2010·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

RATIONALE: There is limited knowledge about the relationship between respiratory symptoms and quantitative high-resolution computed tomography measures of emphysema and airway wall thickness. OBJECTIVES: To describe the ability of these measures of emphysema and airway wall thickness to predict respiratory symptoms in subjects with and without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: We included 463 subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (65% men) and 488 subjects without COPD (53% men). All subjects were current or ex-smokers older than 40 years. They underwent spirometry and high-resolution computed tomography examination, and completed an American Thoracic Society questionnaire on respiratory symptoms. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) percent low-attenuation areas less than -950 Hounsfield units (%LAA) was 7.0 (2.2, 17.8) in subjects with COPD and 0.5 (0.2, 1.3) in subjects without COPD. Mean (SD) standardized airway wall thickness (AWT) at an internal perimeter of 10 mm (AWT-Pi10) was 4.94 (0.33) mm in subjects with COPD and 4.77 (0.29) in subjects without COPD. Both %LAA and AWT-Pi10 were independently and significantly related to the level of dyspnea among subjects with COPD, even after adjustments for percent predicted FEV(1). AWT-Pi10 was significantly related to cough and wheezing in subjects with COPD, and to wheezing in subjects without COPD. Odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for increased dyspnea in subjects with COPD and in subjects without COPD were 1.9 (1.5-2.3) and 1.9 (0.6-6.6) per 10% increase in %LAA, and 1.07 (1.01-1.14) and 1.11 (0.99-1.24) per 0.1-mm increase in AWT-Pi10, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative computed tomography assessment of the lung parenchyma and airways may be used to explain the presence of respiratory symptoms beyond the information offered by spirometry.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1164/rccm.200907-1008oc

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 214

Metadata

Authors
Grydeland, T. B., Dirksen, A., Coxson, H. O., Eagan, T. M. L., Thorsen, E., Pillai, S. G., Sharma, S., Eide, G. E., Gulsvik, A., & Bakke, P. S.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2010-02-15
Volume
181
Issue
4
Pages
353-359
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2054404145
Cited by
214
References
6
FWCI
9.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Quantitative Computed Tomography Measures of Emphysema and Airway Wall Thickness Are Related to Respiratory Symptoms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.200907-1008oc
The paper
Grydeland, T. B., Dirksen, A., Coxson, H. O., Eagan, T. M. L., Thorsen, E., Pillai, S. G., Sharma, S., Eide, G. E., Gulsvik, A., & Bakke, P. S. (2010). Quantitative Computed Tomography Measures of Emphysema and Airway Wall Thickness Are Related to Respiratory Symptoms. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200907-1008oc

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.