Table 4– Comparison of predicted values in adult Caucasian males according to different authors
Author [ref.]a) 17.9 yrs, 160 cmAuthor [ref.]b) 18.0 yrs, 160 cm
Polgar [7]3.093.42NAECSC/ERS [8]3.674.230.83
Rosenthal [82]2.703.690.84Hankinson [17]3.584.120.84
Zapletal [83]2.933.530.85Stanojevic [13]#3.464.090.85
Stanojevic [13]#3.454.080.85GLI 20123.614.130.88
Wang [6]3.493.930.87
GLI 20123.614.120.88
Author [ref.]c) 17.9 yrs, 180 cmAuthor [ref.]d) 18.0 yrs, 180 cm
Polgar [7]4.304.69NAECSC/ERS [8]4.535.380.83
Rosenthal [82] [17]4.535.390.84
Zapletal [83]4.114.990.85Stanojevic [13]#4.565.450.85
Stanojevic [13]#4.555.440.85GLI 20124.695.490.86
Wang [6]4.465.200.86
GLI 20124.685.470.86
Author [ref.]e) 25 yrs, 175 cmAuthor [ref.]f) 55 yrs, 175 cm
Crapo [84]4.455.320.84Crapo [84]3.714.670.79
ECSC/ERS [8]4.315.090.83ECSC/ERS [8]3.444.310.77
Hankinson [17]4.445.360.83Hankinson [17]3.634.740.77
HSE [49]4.435.290.85HSE [49]3.604.630.79
Knudson [85]4.395.240.84Knudson [85]3.524.350.81
Stanojevic [13]#4.425.360.83Stanojevic [13]#3.634.750.77
GLI 20124.465.320.85GLI 20123.654.660.79
  • FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 s; FVC: forced vital capacity; GLI: Global Lungs Initiative; ECSC: European Community for Steel and Coal; ERS: European Respiratory Society; HSE: Health Survey for England 1995–1996; NA: not available. #: all age; : National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) III. The transition from one set of equations to another on the 18th birthday (a versus b or c versus d) is not smooth using older equations. The discontinuity, and the disparity between predicted values is much worse in those who are short for their age (a versus b), than in those of average height (c versus d). In adult males there is fair agreement between predicted values, although those derived from the ECSC/ERS are systematically lower than others for subjects ≥25 yrs of age (e versus f).