SynthesisEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society2025
Patient-reported outcome measures for cough used in interstitial lung disease: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Pragmatic Tele-Nursing Program Improves Satisfaction of Patients with Pulmonary Fibrosis and Their Caregivers-A Pilot Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionValidated and reliable patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are recommended to assess the severity and impact of cough in interstitial lung disease (ILD). We systematically reviewed the literature to identify PROMs for cough in ILD, examining their psychometric properties.
methodsWe searched four databases from inception to 10 January 2025. English-language original articles that described the use of a PROM to measure cough in adults with ILD and addressed the psychometric properties, method of administration or results of usability testing were selected.
results21 PROMs were evaluated in 35 studies, including 14 in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and seven in other ILDs, eight cough-specific PROMs, and 13 disease-specific PROMs with a domain for cough. No tool had sufficient evidence for more than 5/7 of the psychometric properties evaluated. There was evidence for content validity for four PROMs in IPF (A Tool to Assess Quality of Life in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (ATAQ-IPF), the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire (CASA-Q), Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms: COPD (E-RS™:COPD) and the Living with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Questionnaire (L-IPF)). Only one study evaluated convergent validity using objective cough monitoring, demonstrating high validity for the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ) (r=-0.74- -0.80) and cough visual analogue scale (VAS) (r=0.80). Acceptable internal consistency (α>0.7) was demonstrated for 10 PROMs (ATAQ-IPF, the Cross-Atlantic modification of ATAQ-IPF, the Chinese version of ATAQ-IPF, CASA-Q, E-RS™:COPD, LCQ, L-IPF, the IPF-specific version of St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), the modified version of the Edmonton System Assessment System and SGRQ). The cough VAS demonstrated good predictive validity and L-IPF was responsive to ILD-specific therapies, with effect sizes ranging from 0.32 to 0.44.
conclusionEvidence supporting the measurement properties of available PROMs for cough in ILD is limited. Further validation of existing instruments and the development of new disease-specific PROMs are needed.
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.