Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38152077›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of general medicine2023

Further Refinement is Required for Patient-Reported Outcome Scales for Respiratory Diseases Based on Traditional Chinese Medicine Theory for Applicability.

Peng Zhang, Jiaming Ren, Baichuan Xu, Jiajia Wang, Yang Xie

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of general medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Peng ZhangThe First Clinical Medical College, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0009-0009-4444-5371
Jiaming RenThe First Clinical Medical College, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, People's Republic of China.
Baichuan XuThe First Clinical Medical College, Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0009-0003-3943-560X
Jiajia WangDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, People's Republic of China.
Yang XieDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou, Henan, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-2602-7087

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To summarize the contents and assess the methodological quality and measurement properties of the patient-reported outcome (PRO) scales featured with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) for respiratory diseases based on the guideline of COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, VIP, and China Biology Medicine (CBM) were searched for studies on PRO scales featured with TCM for respiratory diseases from their inception until December 2022. The characteristics of the PRO scales were qualitatively summarized. Following the COSMIN guideline, the risk of bias was assessed according to the checklist, and different measurement properties (content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, criterion validity, and responsiveness) were evaluated. Finally, the evidence's overall quality was assessed, and the recommendation was formulated using the modified GRADE approach. Results: A total of 13 scales were included, with 6 for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 3 for lung cancer, 2 for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), 1 for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), and 1 for bronchiectasis. All 13 scales are disease-specific scales and were developed based on Chinese cultural background to measure the efficacy of TCM. The study did not provide information on measurement error, cross-cultural validity, and hypothesis testing for the construct validity of these measures. No scale was rated as sufficient in content validity and responsiveness. Two scales showed sufficient structural validity, while 11 scales exhibited sufficient internal consistency. Three scales demonstrated sufficient reliability, and 7 scales showed sufficient criterion validity. All 13 scales have a recommendation level of B. Conclusion: The 13 scales could reflect the clinical efficacy of TCM and are suitable for the Chinese population. Nevertheless, the validation of these scales was not comprehensive enough, and the methodological quality of their studies needs to be further strengthened.

Indexed as

COSMINpatient-reported outcomequality of liferespiratory diseasetraditional Chinese medicine

Identifiers

PMID38152077
PMCPMC10752031

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.