Observational studyTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease
Validation of the Italian version of Bronchiectasis Quality of Life Questionnaire.
Observational study in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures are essential tools for assessing disease burden in bronchiectasis. The Quality of Life-Bronchiectasis questionnaire (QoL-B) is widely used in clinical research, but a validated Italian version has not been available.
objectivesTo perform a cross-cultural validation of the Italian QoL-B in a real-world cohort of patients with bronchiectasis.
designProspective observational cross-cultural validation study.
methodsAdult patients with bronchiectasis attending a tertiary referral clinic were prospectively enrolled. The Italian QoL-B was administered at baseline (T0) and after 15 days (T1) in clinically stable patients to assess internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Construct validity was evaluated through predefined hypotheses by comparing QoL-B domain scores across clinically relevant subgroups, including exacerbation frequency, dyspnea severity, lung function impairment, and Bronchiectasis Severity Index (BSI) class. Exploratory analyses assessed score variation during exacerbations.
resultsA total of 108 patients were included (median age 64.5 years; 75.9% female). Internal consistency was good across domains (Cronbach's α 0.78-0.89), and test-retest reliability showed stable scores between T0 and T1 with high intraclass correlation coefficients. Construct validity was supported by significant discrimination across disease-burden groups: patients with frequent exacerbations, severe BSI class, or greater dyspnea reported consistently lower scores, particularly in physical functioning and respiratory symptoms domains. The Emotional Functioning domain showed weaker associations with disease severity indicators and was primarily related to mood disorders. QoL-B scores were substantially lower during exacerbations.
conclusionThe Italian QoL-B demonstrates good reliability and construct validity and provides a robust instrument for assessing quality of life in Italian-speaking patients with bronchiectasis.
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.