Evidence Hub

Development and validation of a short questionnaire in community acquired pneumonia

El Moussaoui R, Opmeer BC, Bossuyt PM, Speelman P, de Borgie CA, Prins JM

Thorax, 2004

67 participants · 28 citations

Abstract

Background: A short but sensitive questionnaire evaluating changes in respiratory symptoms and well being during the treatment of community acquired pneumonia (CAP) is needed. We have developed a measurement and evaluated its psychometric properties in 67 patients admitted with CAP.

Methods: The patients were asked to indicate the presence and severity of dyspnoea, coughing, coughing up sputum, coughing up sputum with ease, the colour of the sputum, fatigue, fitness, and their state of health. The item fatigue showed substantial overlap with fitness and was therefore excluded. The response of the patients to the remaining eight items was used to calculate a CAP score.

Results: The percentage of missing data (0.2-1.7%), floor and ceiling effects (0.2/5.5%), internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.87), and the intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reproducibility (0.83) met predefined criteria, indicating good acceptability and reliability. Face and clinical validity were satisfactory. Effect sizes under treatment were large, indicating high responsiveness.

Conclusion: The newly developed CAP score is a simple, reliable, valid, and highly responsive instrument. This makes it scientifically sound and clinically relevant for measuring outcome when evaluating treatment strategies in CAP.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 67 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free