ArticlePloS one2022
Psychometric properties of the sit-to-stand test for patients with pulmonary hypertension: A systematic review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Psychometric properties of the sit-to-stand test for patients with pulmonary hypertension: A systematic review.Brazilian journal of physical therapyPooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary hypertension (PH) is a complex syndrome characterized by increased pulmonary arterial pressure and classified into five groups, according to dyspnea on exertion and systemic muscle dysfunction. These symptoms can be identified using the sit-to-stand test (STS), which indirectly evaluates exercise tolerance and lower limb muscle strength. Previous studies used the STS in PH; however, psychometric properties to understand and validate this test were not described for patients with PH.
objectiveTo evaluate the psychometric properties (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) of different STS protocols in patients with PH. METHODS AND ANALYSES: This is a systematic review protocol that will include studies using STS in patients with PH. Searches will be conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science databases following PICOT mnemonic strategy and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). Rayyan software will be used for study selection. The Risk of bias will be assessed using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) tool, while the quality of evidence will be assessed using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Two researchers will independently conduct the study, and a third researcher will be consulted in case of disagreement. The psychometric properties will be evaluated according to the COSMIN. This protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, no. CRD42021244271).
conclusionThis systematic review will attempt to identify and show the available evidence on STS for different groups of PH and report validity, reliability, and responsiveness of different protocols.
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.