The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Minimally Clinically Important Difference for the UCSD Shortness of Breath Questionnaire, Borg Scale, and Visual Analog Scale
Open accessAbstract
Dyspnea is a primary symptom of chronic lung disease and an important outcome measure for clinical trials. Several standardized measures have been developed to evaluate this important symptom and are being used increasingly in clinical trials. The minimally clinically important difference (MCID) is not well defined for these measures but is important in interpreting the clinical meaning of results of studies in this area. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the MCID for three commonly used measures to assess dyspnea in chronic lung disease: UCSD Shortness of Breath Questionnaire (SOBQ), Borg Scale (Borg), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The analysis is based on a retrospective review of published trials evaluating the response to a pulmonary rehabilitation or exercise intervention that is known to produce modest, but clinically meaningful changes for such patients. Using a distribution-based approach based primarily on effect size, the recommended MCID for these measures are: 5-units for the SOBQ, 1-unit for the Borg scale, and approximately 10 to 20 units for the VAS.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease
Guyatt, G. H., Berman, L. B., Townsend, M., Pugsley, S. O., & Chambers, L. W. (1987) · Thorax · doi:10.1136/thx.42.10.773 · Cited by 1,721
Dyspnea: Mechanisms, Assessment, and Management: A Consensus Statement
(1999) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.159.1.ats898 · Cited by 1,052
Cited by
Davies, H. E., Mishra, E. K., Kahan, B. C., Wrightson, J. M., Stanton, A. E., Guhan, A., Davies, C. W. H., Grayez, J., Harrison, R., Prasad, A., et al. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.5535 · Cited by 657
A Controlled Trial of Sildenafil in Advanced Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
(2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1002110 · Cited by 634
du Bois, R. M., Weycker, D., Albera, C., Bradford, W. Z., Costabel, U., Kartashov, A., King, T. E., Lancaster, L., Noble, P. W., Sahn, S. A., et al. (2011) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201105-0840oc · Cited by 527
Behr, J., Kreuter, M., Hoeper, M. M., Wirtz, H., Klotsche, J., Koschel, D., Andreas, S., Claussen, M., Grohé, C., Wilkens, H., et al. (2015) · European Respiratory Journal · doi:10.1183/09031936.00217614 · Cited by 247
Kreuter, M., Swigris, J., Pittrow, D., Geier, S., Klotsche, J., Prasse, A., Wirtz, H., Koschel, D., Andreas, S., Claussen, M., et al. (2017) · Respiratory Research · doi:10.1186/s12931-017-0621-y · Cited by 210
Metadata
- Authors
- Ries, A. L.
- Venue
- COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 105-110
- ISSN
- 1541-2555 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-2563
- OpenAlex
- W1986804427
- Cited by
- 405
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
