ArticleCureus2023
Psychometric Validity of the Anxiety Inventory for Respiratory Disease (AIR) Scale in an Indian Sample of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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.
- Anxiety Inventory for Respiratory Disease: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Semantic Validity of the Brazilian Version for Individuals with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Researchers have found that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients suffer from anxiety more than the general population. The Anxiety Inventory for Respiratory Disease (AIR) scale has been primarily used to assess non-somatic anxiety in COPD patients. The validity of AIR among COPD patients has not been evaluated in Indian settings. Therefore, this study was undertaken to determine the validity of AIR in these patients. The study aimed to evaluate concurrent criterion and discriminative validity of the AIR screening scale among patients with COPD using Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) 7.0.2 as the gold standard measure for diagnosing Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) anxiety disorders. Materials and methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Outpatients Department (OPD) of the Department of Pulmonary Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, from August 2018 to July 2019. A total of 100 patients diagnosed with COPD and aged 30 or above were recruited. All participants were further assessed in person by a psychiatry resident doctor using semi-structured proforma, MINI 7.0.2, and AIR Disease (Hindi). Mann-Whitney U and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were conducted. The two-sided p-value of less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results To assess the concurrent criterion validity of the AIR scale for screening clinical anxiety disorders, the ROC curve was constructed using MINI diagnoses of anxiety disorder as the gold standard measure. A cut-off score of 5.5 was found to maximize both the specificity and sensitivity of the AIR scale for screening anxiety disorders among COPD patients with COPD. The AIR scale showed a high sensitivity (95%) and specificity (89%) at this cut-point. Conclusion The findings of this study recommend a cut-off score of 5.5 on the AIR scale instead of 8 in previous studies, as maintaining the previously recommended cut-offs in Indian settings may lead to an increase in false negatives. This could have negative consequences for patients seeking treatment. Further studies may be planned to explore the psychometric properties of the current tool in a larger population.
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.