Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25709424›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2015

Systematic literature review of patient-reported outcome measures used in assessment and measurement of sleep disorders in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Adam P Garrow, Janelle Yorke, Naimat Khan, Jørgen Vestbo, Dave Singh, Sarah Tyson

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Measuring Subjective Sleep Quality: A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) in COPD Clinical Trials: Trends and Gaps.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Adam P GarrowUniversity of Manchester Medicines Evaluation Unit, University Hospital of South Manchester Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK ; School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Janelle YorkeSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Naimat KhanUniversity of Manchester Medicines Evaluation Unit, University Hospital of South Manchester Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Jørgen VestboThe University of Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University Hospital South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Dave SinghUniversity of Manchester Medicines Evaluation Unit, University Hospital of South Manchester Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Sarah TysonUniversity of Manchester Medicines Evaluation Unit, University Hospital of South Manchester Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
University of Manchester · GBMedicines Evaluation Unit · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSleep problems are common in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but the validity of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that measure sleep dysfunction has not been evaluated. We have reviewed the literature to identify disease-specific and non-disease-specific sleep PROMs that have been validated for use in COPD patients. The review also examined the psychometric properties of identified sleep outcome measures and extracted point and variability estimates of sleep instruments used in COPD studies.

methodsThe online EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS databases for all years to May 2014 were used to source articles for the review. The review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Criteria from the Medical Outcomes Trust Scientific Advisory Committee guidelines were used to evaluate the psychometric properties of all sleep PROMs identified.

resultsOne COPD-specific and six non-COPD-specific sleep outcome measures were identified and 44 papers met the review selection criteria. We only identified one instrument, the COPD and Asthma Sleep Impact Scale, which was developed specifically for use in COPD populations. Ninety percent of the identified studies used one of two non-disease-specific sleep scales, ie, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and/or the Epworth Sleep Scale, although neither has been tested for reliability or validity in people with COPD.

conclusionThe results highlight a need for existing non-disease-specific instruments to be validated in COPD populations and also a need for new disease-specific measures to assess the impact of sleep problems in COPD.

Indexed as

Self ReportSleepHumansPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisPsychometricsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveRisk FactorsSleep Wake Disorderschronic obstructive pulmonary diseasesleepsymptom assessmentsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID25709424
PMCPMC4330032
OpenAlexW2057093694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.