Jose Manuel Helguera Quevedo
Research Subjects
Jose Manuel Helguera Quevedo has a total of 19 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Ana María Fernández Vargas
Centro de Salud La Victoria, Málaga, Spain
1 shared publication - Ana Moran-Rodríguez
UGC-DCCU Bahía de Cádiz-La Janda, Cadiz, Spain
1 shared publication - Antonio Hidalgo Requena
Centro de Salud de Lucena, Córdoba, Spain
1 shared publication - Carmen Quintana Velasco
Centro de Salud Perpetuo Socorro, Huesca, Spain
1 shared publication - Enrique Mascarós
Centro de Salud Fuente de San Luis, Valencia, Spain
1 shared publication - Fernando María Navarro Ros
Centro de Salud Plaza Segovia, 46017 València, Valencia, Spain
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 11 May 2026
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Respiration
- Vol. 6 (2) , 9
Reframing COPD Instability Under GOLD 2026: A Bayesian Multi-Outcome Retrospective EHR Analysis in Primary Care
Background/Objectives: COPD instability is heterogeneous; GOLD 2026 lowers the prior-year threshold to ≥1 moderate or severe exacerbation. We assessed whether this low-threshold criterion behaves as a high-sensitivity operational signal in primary-care EHRs. Methods: A retrospective multicenter same-window EHR pilot study in two Spanish primary-care centers (n = 106). Predictors and six binary endpoints were aggregated over the same 12-month window: any exacerbation, high-risk history, severe hospitalization, SABA dispensing, SAMA dispensing, and any rescue dispensing. We fitted Bayesian multi-outcome hierarchical logistic models with patient-level random intercepts, cross-endpoint partial pooling, regularizing priors, and missingness indicators. Robustness used prespecified scenarios, 10-fold ELPD cross-validation, and high-missingness exclusion. Results: Any exacerbation occurred in 53/106 patients; high-risk history in 25/106; hospitalization in 16/106; and any rescue dispensing in 65/106. Diagnostics were stable, and posterior predictive checks supported marginal adequacy. Heart failure showed the clearest positive pattern across exacerbation-defined endpoints; reliever-dispensing endpoints showed a distinct care-pathway-sensitive pattern. No scenario improved out-of-sample adequacy. High-missingness exclusion preserved directionality in 120/120 overlapping pairs; the median |ΔlogOR| was 0.061; and 119/120 remained within ±log(1.25). Conclusions: GOLD 2026 “any exacerbation” behaved as a high-sensitivity operational signal in an endpoint-operating-point sense, not as a homogeneous phenotype. Findings are within-window associations, not causal, medication-effect, or prospective prediction estimates; external validation is required.
- 11 May 2026
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Respiration
- Vol. 6 (2) , 9
Open AccessReframing COPD Instability Under GOLD 2026: A Bayesian Multi-Outcome Retrospective EHR Analysis in Primary Care
Background/Objectives: COPD instability is heterogeneous; GOLD 2026 lowers the prior-year threshold to ≥1 moderate or severe exacerbation. We assessed whether this low-threshold criterion behaves as a high-sensitivity operational signal in primary-care EHRs. Methods: A retrospective multicenter same-window EHR pilot study in two Spanish primary-care centers (n = 106). Predictors and six binary endpoints were aggregated over the same 12-month window: any exacerbation, high-risk history, severe hospitalization, SABA dispensing, SAMA dispensing, and any rescue dispensing. We fitted Bayesian multi-outcome hierarchical logistic models with patient-level random intercepts, cross-endpoint partial pooling, regularizing priors, and missingness indicators. Robustness used prespecified scenarios, 10-fold ELPD cross-validation, and high-missingness exclusion. Results: Any exacerbation occurred in 53/106 patients; high-risk history in 25/106; hospitalization in 16/106; and any rescue dispensing in 65/106. Diagnostics were stable, and posterior predictive checks supported marginal adequacy. Heart failure showed the clearest positive pattern across exacerbation-defined endpoints; reliever-dispensing endpoints showed a distinct care-pathway-sensitive pattern. No scenario improved out-of-sample adequacy. High-missingness exclusion preserved directionality in 120/120 overlapping pairs; the median |ΔlogOR| was 0.061; and 119/120 remained within ±log(1.25). Conclusions: GOLD 2026 “any exacerbation” behaved as a high-sensitivity operational signal in an endpoint-operating-point sense, not as a homogeneous phenotype. Findings are within-window associations, not causal, medication-effect, or prospective prediction estimates; external validation is required.
- Open Access
- 3 July 2018
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Vol. 18 (1) , 1-13
Community Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study: a clinical audit on primary care performance variability in COPD care
A thorough evaluation of the adequacy of clinical practice in a designated health care setting and temporal context is key for clinical care improvement. This study aimed to perform a clinical audit of primary care to evaluate clinical care delivered to patients with COPD in routine clinical practice. The Community Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study was an observational, multicenter, nationwide, non-interventional, retrospective, clinical audit of randomly selected primary care centers in Spain. Two different databases were built: the resources and organization database and the clinical database. From January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016 consecutive clinical cases of COPD in each participating primary care center (PCC) were audited. For descriptive purposes, we collected data regarding the age at diagnosis of COPD and the age at audit, gender, the setting of the PCC (rural/urban), and comorbidities for each patient. Two guidelines widely and uniformly used in Spain were carefully reviewed to establish a benchmark of adequacy for the audited cases. Clinical performance was analyzed at the patient, center, and regional levels. The degree of adequacy was categorized as excellent (> 80%), good (60–80%), adequate (40–59%), inadequate (20–39%), and highly inadequate (< 20%). During the study 4307 cases from 63 primary care centers in 6 regions of the country were audited. Most evaluated parameters were judged to fall in the inadequate performance category. A correct diagnosis based on previous exposure plus spirometric obstruction was made in an average of 17.6% of cases, ranging from 9.8 to 23.3% depending on the region. During the audited visit, only 67 (1.6%) patients had current post-bronchodilator obstructive spirometry; 184 (4.3%) patients had current post-bronchodilator obstructive spirometry during either the audited or initial diagnostic visit. Evaluation of dyspnea was performed in 11.1% of cases. Regarding treatment, 33.6% received no maintenance inhaled therapies (ranging from 31.3% in GOLD A to 7.0% in GOLD D). The two most frequently registered items were exacerbations in the previous year (81.4%) and influenza vaccination (87.7%). The results of this audit revealed a large variability in clinical performance across centers, which was not fully attributable to the severity of the disease.
- 3 July 2018
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Vol. 18 (1) , 1-13
Open AccessCommunity Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study: a clinical audit on primary care performance variability in COPD care
A thorough evaluation of the adequacy of clinical practice in a designated health care setting and temporal context is key for clinical care improvement. This study aimed to perform a clinical audit of primary care to evaluate clinical care delivered to patients with COPD in routine clinical practice. The Community Assessment of COPD Health Care (COACH) study was an observational, multicenter, nationwide, non-interventional, retrospective, clinical audit of randomly selected primary care centers in Spain. Two different databases were built: the resources and organization database and the clinical database. From January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016 consecutive clinical cases of COPD in each participating primary care center (PCC) were audited. For descriptive purposes, we collected data regarding the age at diagnosis of COPD and the age at audit, gender, the setting of the PCC (rural/urban), and comorbidities for each patient. Two guidelines widely and uniformly used in Spain were carefully reviewed to establish a benchmark of adequacy for the audited cases. Clinical performance was analyzed at the patient, center, and regional levels. The degree of adequacy was categorized as excellent (> 80%), good (60–80%), adequate (40–59%), inadequate (20–39%), and highly inadequate (< 20%). During the study 4307 cases from 63 primary care centers in 6 regions of the country were audited. Most evaluated parameters were judged to fall in the inadequate performance category. A correct diagnosis based on previous exposure plus spirometric obstruction was made in an average of 17.6% of cases, ranging from 9.8 to 23.3% depending on the region. During the audited visit, only 67 (1.6%) patients had current post-bronchodilator obstructive spirometry; 184 (4.3%) patients had current post-bronchodilator obstructive spirometry during either the audited or initial diagnostic visit. Evaluation of dyspnea was performed in 11.1% of cases. Regarding treatment, 33.6% received no maintenance inhaled therapies (ranging from 31.3% in GOLD A to 7.0% in GOLD D). The two most frequently registered items were exacerbations in the previous year (81.4%) and influenza vaccination (87.7%). The results of this audit revealed a large variability in clinical performance across centers, which was not fully attributable to the severity of the disease.