Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27197970›Full record

ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2016

Adaptation and validation of the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) for the Netherlands.

M Wapenaar, J Twiss, M Wagenaar, P Seijkens, L van den Toorn, J Stepanous, A Heaney, A van den Bosch, K A Boomars

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review for use in patients with pulmonary hypertension in Colombia.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2019
    Article
  3. Pulmonary hypertension: the importance of a multidisciplinary approach.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2016
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

M WapenaarDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Erasmus Medical University Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J TwissGalen Research Ltd, Manchester, UK.
M WagenaarDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
P SeijkensDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Erasmus Medical University Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
L van den ToornDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Erasmus Medical University Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J StepanousGalen Research Ltd, Manchester, UK.
A HeaneyGalen Research Ltd, Manchester, UK.
A van den BoschDepartment of Cardiology, Erasmus Medical University Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
K A BoomarsDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Erasmus Medical University Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. k.boomars@erasmusmc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) is the first disease-specific instrument for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) to assess patient-perceived symptoms, activity limitations and quality of life. To be able to use this questionnaire in the Netherlands, the aim of the study was to translate and validate this instrument for the Dutch-speaking population.

methodsFirst the CAMPHOR was translated into Dutch (by means of a bilingual and a lay panel) and field-tested by means of cognitive debriefing interviews with ten PAH patients. For psychometric evaluation, 80 patients with PAH or chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) were asked to complete the CAMPHOR twice over a two-week period. To test for construct validity, participants also completed the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP).

resultsThe Dutch version of the CAMPHOR showed high internal consistency for all scales (Cronbach's alpha 0.89-0.91) and excellent reproducibility over two weeks (reliability coefficients 0.87-0.91). Concurrent validity showed that the CAMPHOR scales correlated as expected with the NHP scales. The CAMPHOR was able to distinguish between patient groups based on self-reported general health status, disease severity and NYHA classification demonstrating evidence of known group validity. The CAMPHOR activity limitations scale correlated moderately with the distance walked during the 6‑minute walk test (r = -0.47, p < 0.01) and the symptoms scale with the Borg dyspnoea score (r = 0.51, p < 0.01).

conclusionThe Dutch version of the CAMPHOR is a reliable and valid measure of quality of life and health status in patients with PAH and CTEPH is recommended for use in routine care and in clinical research.

Indexed as

CAMPHOR health questionnaireChronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertensionHealth-related quality of lifePulmonary arterial hypertension

Identifiers

PMID27197970
PMCPMC4887309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.