Pulmonary Function Test Study - Automated Interpretation

September 3, 2018 updated by: Wim Janssens, KU Leuven
A multicentric study to explore variability when clinicians are intrepreting lung function tests. Comparison with results of in-house built software for automatic interpretation.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Detailed Description

This is a multi-center non-interventional retrospective study that will use data obtained from clinical routine. In the hospital, subjects with or without respiratory complaints undergo subset of (or complete) pulmonary function tests if clinically indicated. Results of these tests, expressed as numerical values are send to the clinical workstation (KWS) for immediate clinical use. These results are subsequently being interpreted by a clinician.

A random sample of 50 lung function printouts of subjects followed at the Leuven pulmonary service with a final diagnosis of a respiratory disease have been randomised. These anonymized printouts will be given to different pulmonologists for examination in 18 different centers and compared with the interpretation of in-house developed software.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
50

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Belgium
      • Leuven, Belgium, 3000
        • UZ Leuven

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Subjects with or without respiratory complaints undergo subset of (or complete) pulmonary function tests

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Age more than 18 years
  2. Completed one or more pulmonary function tests

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Younger than 18
  2. Lung transplantation, lung cancer.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Cohort
  • Time Perspectives: Retrospective

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Interclass correlation coëfficiënt for whole group
Time Frame: 6 months
Variation in preferred primary diagnosis of respiratory disease given by every physician for every case (selection of one diagnosis out of a fixed panel of 9 possible diagnoses).
6 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Interclass correlation coëfficiënt for every case
Time Frame: 6 months
Variation in preferred primary diagnosis of respiratory disease given by every physician for an individual case (selection of one diagnosis out of a fixed panel of 9 possible diagnoses).
6 months
Accuracy of physicians expressed as a percentage of correct diagnoses per case (%)
Time Frame: 6 months
Comparison of diagnostic labels per case provided by the physicians with gold standard diagnosis based on clinical characteristics, complete pulmonary function test data and all other investigations (CT scan, biochmestry, functional test, biopsy, etc...) needed to come to a gold standard diagnosis.
6 months
Accuracy of physicans expressed as a percentage of correct diagnoses in total group (%)
Time Frame: 6 months
Comparison of diagnostic labels per case provided by the physicians with gold standard diagnosis based on clinical characteristics, complete pulmonary function test data and all other investigations (CT scan, biochmestry, functional test, biopsy, etc...) needed to come to a gold standard diagnosis.
6 months
Accuracy of physicians expressed as a percentage of correct diagnoses per hospital (group) (%)
Time Frame: 6 months
Comparison of diagnostic labels per case provided by the group of physicians per hospital with gold standard diagnosis based on clinical characteristics, complete pulmonary function test data and all other investigations (CT scan, biochmestry, functional test, biopsy, etc...) needed to come to a gold standard diagnosis.
6 months
Accuracy of software expressed as a percentage of correct diagnoses in total group, per hospital and per case
Time Frame: 6 months
Comparing labels of in-house developed software for the clinical interpretation and diagnostic labeling of complete pulmonary function tests with GOLD standard based on all additional tests
6 months
Comparison of accuracy (% of correct diagnoses) of physicians with software
Time Frame: 6 months
Comparing the diagnostic labels provided by in-house developed software for the clinical interpretation and diagnostic labeling of complete pulmonary function tests with those of physicans (in total group, per hospital and per case)
6 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
KU Leuven

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
University Medical Center Groningen
Maastricht University Medical Center
University of Liege
Jessa Hospital
University Hospital, Ghent
University Hospital, Grenoble
AZ Sint-Jan AV
Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg
Philipps University Marburg Medical Center
University Hospital, Paris
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Saint Pierre
University Medical Center Nijmegen
Onze Lieve Vrouwziekenhuis Aalst
Centre Hospitalier du Luxembourg
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Charleroi
University Hospital St Luc, Brussels

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Wim Janssens, Prof. Dr., UZ Leuven

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
August 1, 2017

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
December 30, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
April 1, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
August 1, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 25, 2017

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
August 29, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
September 5, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
September 3, 2018

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
September 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • S60619

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Respiratory Disease

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings