Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 262

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pulmonary hypertension in COPD: results from the ASPIRE registry

Hurdman, Judith, Condliffe, Robin, Elliot, Charlie A., Swift, Andrew, Rajaram, Smitha, Davies, Christine, Hill, Catherine, Hamilton, Neil, Armstrong, Iain J., Billings, Catherine, Pollard, Lauren, Wild, Jim M., Lawrie, Allan, Lawson, Rod, Sabroe, Ian, Kiely, David G.·2013·European Respiratory Journal

Abstract

The phenotype and outcome of severe pulmonary hypertension in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is described in small numbers, and predictors of survival are unknown. Data was retrieved for 101 consecutive, treatment-naïve cases of pulmonary hypertension in COPD. Mean± sd follow-up was 2.3±1.9 years. 59 patients with COPD and severe pulmonary hypertension, defined by catheter mean pulmonary artery pressure ≥40 mmHg, had significantly lower carbon monoxide diffusion, less severe airflow obstruction but not significantly different emphysema scores on computed tomography compared to 42 patients with mild–moderate pulmonary hypertension. 1- and 3-year survival for severe pulmonary hypertension, at 70% and 33%, respectively, was inferior to 83% and 55%, respectively, for mild–moderate pulmonary hypertension. Mixed venous oxygen saturation, carbon monoxide diffusion, World Health Organization functional class and age, but not severity of airflow obstruction, were independent predictors of outcome. Compassionate treatment with targeted therapies in 43 patients with severe pulmonary hypertension was not associated with a survival benefit, although improvement in functional class and/or fall in pulmonary vascular resistance >20% following treatment identified patients with improved survival. Standard prognostic markers in COPD have limited value in patients with pulmonary hypertension. This study identifies variables that predict outcome in this phenotype. Despite poor prognosis, our data suggest that further evaluation of targeted therapies is warranted.

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 · 10.1183/09031936.00079512

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 262

Metadata

Authors
Hurdman, J., Condliffe, R., Elliot, C. A., Swift, A., Rajaram, S., Davies, C., Hill, C., Hamilton, N., Armstrong, I. J., Billings, C., Pollard, L., Wild, J. M., Lawrie, A., Lawson, R., Sabroe, I., & Kiely, D. G.
Venue
European Respiratory Journal
Published
2012-09-27
Volume
41
Issue
6
Pages
1292-1301
ISSN
  • 0903-1936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-3003
OpenAlex
W2128313317
Cited by
262
References
2
FWCI
12.09
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: Pulmonary hypertension in COPD: results from the ASPIRE registry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1183/09031936.00079512
The paper
Hurdman, J., Condliffe, R., Elliot, C. A., Swift, A., Rajaram, S., Davies, C., Hill, C., Hamilton, N., Armstrong, I. J., Billings, C., Pollard, L., Wild, J. M., Lawrie, A., Lawson, R., Sabroe, I., & Kiely, D. G. (2013). Pulmonary hypertension in COPD: results from the ASPIRE registry. European Respiratory Journal. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00079512

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.