CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 103Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesRespiratory and Cough-Related Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diagnostic tests of hyperventilation syndrome

Vansteenkiste, J, Rochette, F, Demedts, M·1991·European Respiratory Journal
DOI 10.1183/09031936.93.04040393
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In 90 patients referred to the pulmonary function laboratory for evaluation of hyperventilation syndrome (HVS) and in whom somatic causes of the complaints had been excluded, we investigated the degree of concordance between three widely applied diagnostic methods: 1) the standardized Nijmegen questionnaire on major daily complaints; 2) the reproduction of the same symptoms during the hyperventilation provocation test (HVPT); and 3) the responses of end-tidal CO2 fraction (FETCO2) during the HVPT. In 86% of the patients a concordance was found between Nijmegen questionnaire (i.e. score of 24/64 or more) and symptom reproduction during HVPT (i.e. recognition of at least 2 major daily complaints). Based on these combined data we made a definite diagnosis of HVS in 37 patients, of non-HVS in 40 patients, and we retained only a possible HVS in 13 patients. Each of the 16 complaints in the questionnaire contributed significantly to the distinction between HVS and non-HVS patients, and a striking similarity in rank order of daily complaints and reproduced symptoms was found. The responses in FETCO, during HVPT had little additional diagnostic value. A spontaneous fall of at least 0.25% FETCO2 during the 5 min adaptation period before the HVPT, was most reliably correlated with the aforementioned diagnostic criteria of HVS: specificity 83%, sensitivity 57%, and accuracy 70%. Neither the 3 min FETCO2 ratio nor the 5 min FETCO2 ratio during recovery after the HVPT showed a good correl…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1183/09031936.93.04040393

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 103

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Vansteenkiste, J., Rochette, F., & Demedts, M.
Affiliations
KU Leuven (BE)
Venue
European Respiratory Journal
Publisher
European Respiratory Society (ERS)
Published
1991-04-01
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
393-399
ISSN
  • 0903-1936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-3003
DOI
10.1183/09031936.93.04040393
OpenAlex
W2099211239
Cited by
103
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Respiratory Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory and Cough-Related Research
Keywords
hyperventilation syndrome, end-tidal carbon dioxide, Nijmegen questionnaire, diagnostic accuracy, hyperventilation
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adult, Female, Humans, Hyperventilation, Male, Pulmonary Gas Exchange, Surveys and Questionnaires, Respiratory Function Tests

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