ArticleBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
Cross-cultural validation of the SNOT-22 questionnaire in the Colombian population.
Article in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo validate and culturally adapt the SNOT-22 for use in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis in Colombia.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted to assess the content validity, construct validity, and reliability of the SNOT-22 in a Colombian sample. Cultural adaptation involved expert review and patient testing to ensure comprehension and relevance.
resultsItem adaptation and comprehension were achieved through consensus by six expert rhinologists and subsequent validation with 15 otorhinolaryngologists and 24 patients. The third item was modified for better comprehension. Content validity indices confirmed the questionnaire's relevance, sufficiency, and comprehension, though some redundancy was noted in emotional and ear/facial symptom domains. In a sample of 221 completed questionnaires, polychoric correlations showed positive inter-item relationships. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.97; ω = 0.96), and the model demonstrated good fit. Convergent validity with the Visual Analog Scale showed a Spearman correlation of 0.74. The questionnaire also showed strong discriminative validity, differentiating patients with and without rhinosinusitis (mean score difference of 49-points; Mann-Whitney effect size = 0.41). The Area Under the Curve (AUC) was 0.92, with 71.5% sensitivity and 4.8% false positive rate.
conclusionThe Colombian version of the SNOT-22 demonstrated strong patient comprehension, content validity, high internal consistency, and effective discriminative capacity. These results support its use as a reliable clinical tool for evaluating chronic rhinosinusitis in the Colombian population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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.