Adaptation and validation of the Dutch version of the nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) scale
Open accessAbstract
The nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) scale is a validated disease-specific, self-completed questionnaire for the assessment of quality of life related to nasal obstruction. The aim of this study was to validate the Dutch (NL-NOSE) questionnaire. A prospective instrument validation study was performed in a tertiary academic referral center. Guidelines for the cross-cultural adaptation process from the original English language scale into a Dutch language version were followed. Patients undergoing functional septoplasty or septorhinoplasty and asymptomatic controls completed the questionnaire both before and 3 months after surgery to test reliability and validity. Additionally, we explored the possibility to reduce the NOSE scale even further using graded response models. 129 patients and 50 controls were included. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.82) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.89) were good. The instrument showed excellent between-group discrimination (Mann-Whitney U = 85, p < 0.001) and high response sensitivity to change (Wilcoxon rank p < 0.001). The NL-NOSE correlated well with the score on a visual analog scale measuring the subjective sensation of nasal obstruction, with exception of item 4 (trouble sleeping). Item 4 provided the least information to the total scale and item 3 (trouble breathing through nose) the most, particularly in the postoperative group. The Dutch version of the NOSE (NL-NOSE) demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity. We recommend the use of the NL-NOSE as a validated instrument to measure subjective severity of nasal obstruction in Dutch adult patients.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Social value orientation is a relatively stable personality feature describing a person's intrinsic willingness to behave prosocially, and it has been found to predict trusting decisions and sensitivity to social cues.
“SVO is a relatively stable personality feature describing a person's intrinsic willingness to behave prosocially 48 , that has been found to predict trusting decisions 49 and sensitivity to social cues 50 .”
From A registered replication study on oxytocin and trust (2020) · cites this paper as [48]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research
Brown, T. A. (2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2769 · Cited by 15,613 · see citing works
Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures
Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014 · Cited by 14,542 · see citing works
Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012 · Cited by 10,764 · see citing works
Cicchetti, D. V. (1994) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284 · Cited by 9,349 · see citing works
Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria
Lohr, K. N. (2002) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1023/a:1015291021312 · Cited by 2,281 · see citing works
Development and Validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale1
Stewart, M. G., Witsell, D. L., Smith, T. L., Weaver, E. M., Yueh, B., & Hannley, M. (2004) · Otolaryngology · doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016 · Cited by 1,221 · see citing works
van Belle, G. (2002) · Wiley-Interscience eBooks · Cited by 464 · see citing works
Parameter Recovery in the Graded Response Model Using MULTILOG
Reise, S. P., & Yu, J. (1990) · Journal of Educational Measurement · doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990.tb00738.x · Cited by 277 · see citing works
Rhee, J. S., Sullivan, C. D., Frank, D. O., Kimbell, J. S., & Garcia, G. J. M. (2014) · JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamafacial.2013.2473 · Cited by 204 · see citing works
French Validation of the NOSE and RhinoQOL Questionnaires in the Management of Nasal Obstruction
Marro, M., Mondina, M., Stoll, D., & de Gabory, L. (2011) · Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery · doi:10.1177/0194599811400686 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Bezerra, T., Pádua, F., Pilan, R., Stewart, M., & Voegels, R. (2011) · Rhinology · doi:10.4193/rhino10.019 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Larrosa, F., Roura, J., Dura, M. J., Guirao, M., Alberti, A., & Alobid, I. (2015) · Rhinology journal · doi:10.4193/rhino14.137 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Reliability and validity of the Italian nose obstruction symptom evaluation (I-NOSE) scale
Mozzanica, F., Urbani, E., Atac, M., Scottà, G., Luciano, K., Bulgheroni, C., Cristofaro, V. D., Gera, R., Schindler, A., & Ottaviani, F. (2013) · European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology · doi:10.1007/s00405-013-2426-z · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale for Greek Patients
Lachanas, V. A., Tsiouvaka, S., Tsea, M., Hajiioannou, J. K., & Skoulakis, C. (2014) · Otolaryngology · doi:10.1177/0194599814544631 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
[Development of the Chinese nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) questionnaire].
Dong, D., Zhao, Y., Stewart, M. G., et al. (2014) · PubMed · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A registered replication study on oxytocin and trust
Declerck, C. H., Boone, C., Pauwels, L., Vogt, B., & Fehr, E. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0878-x · Cited by 137 · see citing works
- Authors
- van Zijl, F. V. W. J., Timman, R., & Datema, F. R.
- Affiliations
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- Venue
- European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
- Published
- 2017-03-03
- Volume
- 274
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2469-2476
- ISSN
- 0937-4477 (ISSN-L)
- 1434-4726
- PMC
- PMC5419999
- OpenAlex
- W2594922369
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5
- FWCI
- 6.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Sinusitis and nasal conditions
- Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
- Keywords
- nasal obstruction, NOSE scale, Dutch translation, cross-cultural adaptation, quality of life, septorhinoplasty, postoperative outcomes, questionnaire validation, graded response model, sleep disorders
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Postoperative Complications, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Respiration, Sleep Wake Disorders, Translating, Reproducibility of Results, Nasal Obstruction, Nasal Surgical Procedures, Symptom Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
