What question did this study set out to answer?

To assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of forced vital capacity (FVC) and determine its minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

September 22, 2011American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineOpen Access

Forced Vital Capacity in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Test Properties and Minimal Clinically Important Difference

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

RBRoland M. du BoisImperial College London DWDerek WeyckerAdvisory Board Company (United States)CACarlo AlberaUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Clinical trial analysis reveals measurement reliability and clinical significance of forced vital capacity in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, indicating subtle declines carry mortality risk.

Key Points

To assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of forced vital capacity (FVC) and determine its minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.
Analyzed data from 1,156 randomized patients enrolled across two clinical trials evaluating IFN-γ1b.
Assessed percent-predicted FVC alongside other functional status markers at baseline and 24-week intervals to determine test-retest reliability, cross-sectional validity, and longitudinal responsiveness.
Calculated the MCID using both distribution-based and anchor-based estimation approaches.
Test-retest reliability of percent-predicted FVC across a mean 18-day interval was high (r = 0.93; P < 0.001).
Correlation with carbon monoxide diffusing capacity was r = 0.38 (P < 0.001), while correlations between 24-week changes in FVC and other functional markers ranged from r = 0.16 to 0.37 (P < 0.001).
A 24-week decline in FVC between 5% and 10% was associated with a more than twofold higher 1-year risk of death (P < 0.001), with the overall estimated MCID identified as 2–6%.

Cite This Study

Bois et al. (2011) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0c6efdb8b59718cfe883ec https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201105-0840oc

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

September 22, 2011American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineOpen Access

Forced Vital Capacity in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: Test Properties and Minimal Clinically Important Difference

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

RBRoland M. du BoisImperial College London DWDerek WeyckerAdvisory Board Company (United States)CACarlo AlberaUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Clinical trial analysis reveals measurement reliability and clinical significance of forced vital capacity in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, indicating subtle declines carry mortality risk.

Key Points

To assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of forced vital capacity (FVC) and determine its minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.
Analyzed data from 1,156 randomized patients enrolled across two clinical trials evaluating IFN-γ1b.
Assessed percent-predicted FVC alongside other functional status markers at baseline and 24-week intervals to determine test-retest reliability, cross-sectional validity, and longitudinal responsiveness.
Calculated the MCID using both distribution-based and anchor-based estimation approaches.
Test-retest reliability of percent-predicted FVC across a mean 18-day interval was high (r = 0.93; P < 0.001).
Correlation with carbon monoxide diffusing capacity was r = 0.38 (P < 0.001), while correlations between 24-week changes in FVC and other functional markers ranged from r = 0.16 to 0.37 (P < 0.001).
A 24-week decline in FVC between 5% and 10% was associated with a more than twofold higher 1-year risk of death (P < 0.001), with the overall estimated MCID identified as 2–6%.

Cite This Study

Bois et al. (2011) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0c6efdb8b59718cfe883ec https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201105-0840oc

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark