ArticleRespirology (Carlton, Vic.)2026
Preliminary Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Inducible Laryngeal Obstruction: Findings From a Delphi Process.
Article in Respirology (Carlton, Vic.), 2026. 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.
- Preliminary Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Inducible Laryngeal Obstruction: Findings From a Delphi Process.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveInducible laryngeal obstruction (ILO) is a laryngeal disorder that intermittently affects breathing. A psychometrically robust patient-reported outcome measure for ILO is required. We have generated items from individual patient interviews and a scoping review. The objective of this study is to ascertain which items covering the physical, social, and psychological impact of ILO were relevant for measuring the impact of living with ILO to inform a new patient-reported outcome measure.
methodsAn international two-round online Delphi study was conducted amongst a group including patients with ILO and relevant health care professionals. Participants judged the relevance of 80 items about the impact of ILO on a 9-point scale. We defined consensus as a minimum of 70% of participants rating items as 7-9. Participants were asked to give a reason for their ratings.
resultsForty-six participants registered for the Delphi survey, with 37/46 (80%) and 29/37 (78%) completing rounds one and two, respectively. Participants were patients living with ILO (63%), respiratory physicians (10%), speech and language therapists (16%), physiotherapists (5%), a psychologist (3%) and a nurse (3%). Consensus was reached after round two for 37/80 (46%) to include, 11/80 (14%) not important to include and 32/80 (40%) being important but not critical to include [therefore 43/80 (54%) excluded].
conclusionStakeholders agreed on 37 items that should be included in a PROM for ILO. Further studies to establish the psychometrics of a PROM based on these items are required.
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.