ArticleChinese journal of integrative medicine2015
Development and validation of a patient reported outcome instrument for chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases.
Article in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Chinese Herbal Medicine on Acute Exacerbations of COPD: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020Trial
- An evaluation of activity tolerance, patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction with the effectiveness of pulmonary daoyin on patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2017Trial
- Identifying and developing EQ-5D-5L bolt-on items for Chinese chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
- Validation of an Inhaled Therapy Beliefs Questionnaire in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Further Refinement is Required for Patient-Reported Outcome Scales for Respiratory Diseases Based on Traditional Chinese Medicine Theory for Applicability.International journal of general medicine · 2023Review
- Development and Validation of the Modified Patient-Reported Outcome Scale for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (mCOPD-PRO).International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and validate a specific patient reported outcome (PRO) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients (COPD-PRO) at a set of standardized procedures.
methodsLiterature analysis, interview and group discussion were performed to draft an initial model of COPD-PRO. Thereafter, 65 clinicians and experts throughout China reviewed the draft scale. Then cognitive debriefing interviews with 40 patients were conducted to assess respondent comprehension of the scale. After that, the revised scale was validated through pre-testing and field-testing. Finally, the psychometric properties of the COPD-PRO were evaluated by indicators such as validity, reliability and responsiveness based on the data from 230 patients.
resultsThe COPD-PRO contained 17 items in 3 domains: amelioration of clinical symptoms, satisfaction of health condition and satisfaction of treatment effect. The Cronbach's α, Split-half coefficient and test-retest coefficient were 0.806, 0.744, 0.703, respectively; the correlation coefficients between domains and overall scale were 0.835-0.963; 5 factors were extracted according to the conceptual model. The differences of the scale scores before and after treatment were statistically significant (P=0.000).
conclusionsThe COPDPRO has good validity, reliability and responsiveness. The COPD-PRO could provide patients' response to the treatments and then evaluate the effect of treatment in a standardized way.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.