ArticleThe clinical respiratory journal2022
The Korean-Lung Information Needs Questionnaire: Translation, validation and clinical implications in comprehensive pulmonary rehabilitation.
Article in The clinical respiratory journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Korean-Lung Information Needs Questionnaire: Translation, validation and clinical implications in comprehensive pulmonary rehabilitation.The clinical respiratory journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by airflow limitation and persistent respiratory symptoms. Several symptom-related questionnaires have been validated to improve understanding for patient with COPD. We aimed to systematically translate the English version of the Lung Information Needs Questionnaire (LINQ) into Korean and to verify the reliability, validity and clinical implications in comprehensive pulmonary rehabilitation (PR).
methodsThe original version of LINQ was translated into Korean by two translators and reviewed by the translation committee. It was then reverse translated back into English. The committee compared the reconciled version in Korean and the original version in English. A cognitive debriefing was performed on the pre-final version, and a final version, K-LINQ, was obtained. A test-retest method for the analysis of reliability was performed within 2 weeks. Concurrent validity analysis was performed using Pearson correlation test of the K-LINQ and other evaluation tools.
resultsA total of 110 patients were enrolled. The length, readability, understanding and suitability of the questionnaire rated well in scores for face validity of 52 Korean patients with COPD. No significant correlation was derived from the total K-LINQ and each domain with other scales such as mMRC, K-CAT and K-LCADL. The intra-class correlation coefficient of total score K-LINQ showed high reliability. Patients who attended PR showed significantly poor pulmonary function or more severe symptoms. In addition, a significantly lower score in total score and exercise domain of K-LINQ were confirmed in the group of PR attendees.
conclusionsWe translated the LINQ into Korean, implemented cross-cultural adaptation and verified its validity and reliability. K-LINQ can now be useful in various clinical and research fields in the Republic of Korea and could serve a complementary role and become an axis of successful treatment strategies, including a comprehensive PR programme.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.