ArticleOpen respiratory archives
[BioSAT: Development and conceptual validation of a satisfaction questionnaire regarding biologic therapies for severe asthma through a structured patient-professional co-creation process].
Article in Open respiratory archives. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The benefits of biologic therapies in severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA) have primarily focused on clinical and lung function variables. However, other patient-relevant dimensions, such as confidence in treatment, comfort, or emotional impact, have been scarcely explored. The objective of this study was to develop a specific Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) questionnaire and conduct its conceptual and content validation to assess patient satisfaction. Material and methods: A sequential qualitative study following ISPOR recommendations for the development of PRO instruments. A multidisciplinary committee comprising 5 pulmonologists and 5 patients with SSEA defined the priority domains. Following iterative and structured development, the preliminary version underwent conceptual, content, and linguistic validation through cognitive interviews with 10 adult patients with SSEA treated with biologics. A qualitative analysis was performed. Results: The final questionnaire (BioSAT) consists of 10 Likert-scale items (1-5) that explore time to benefit, convenience of administration, ease of use, symptom control, adverse effects, improvement in physical activity, benefit in social relationships, emotional well-being, therapeutic trust, and experience with systemic corticosteroids. The interviews revealed adequate understanding of the questionnaire, as well as high relevance and acceptability. Conclusions: BioSAT is the first Spanish questionnaire designed to measure patient satisfaction among patients with NCSA undergoing biologic therapy. Its brevity, clinical focus, and methodological alignment with international standards position it as a useful tool in clinical practice.
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.