Cited by 369Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchHealth Education and ValidationPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Quantification of dyspnoea using descriptors: development and initial testing of the Dyspnoea-12

Open access
Yorke, J, Moosavi, S H, Shuldham, C, Jones, P W·2010·Thorax

Abstract

RATIONALE: Dyspnoea is a debilitating and distressing symptom that is reflected in different verbal descriptors. Evidence suggests that dyspnoea, like pain perception, consists of sensory quality and affective components. The objective of this study was to develop an instrument that measures overall dyspnoea severity using descriptors that reflect its different aspects. METHODS: 81 dyspnoea descriptors were administered to 123 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 129 with interstitial lung disease and 106 with chronic heart failure. These were reduced to 34 items using hierarchical methods. Rasch analysis informed decisions regarding further item removal and fit to the unidimensional model. Principal component analysis (PCA) explored the underlying structure of the final item set. Validity and reliability of the new instrument were further assessed in a separate group of 53 patients with COPD. RESULTS: After removal of items with hierarchical methods (n = 47) and items that failed to fit the Rasch model (n = 22), 12 were retained. The "Dyspnoea-12" had good internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.9) and fit to the Rasch model (chi(2) p = 0.08). Items patterned into two groups called "physical"(n = 7) and "affective"(n = 5). In the separate validation study, Dyspnoea-12 correlated with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (anxiety r = 0.51; depression r = 0.44, p<0.001, respectively), 6-minute walk distance (r = -0.38, p<0.01) and MRC (Medical Research Council) grade (r = 0.48, p<0.01), and had good stability over time (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.9, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Dyspnoea-12 fulfills modern psychometric requirements for measurement. It provides a global score of breathlessness severity that incorporates both "physical" and "affective" aspects, and can measure dyspnoea in a variety of diseases.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/thx.2009.118521

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Some patient-reported outcome measures are not validated in all presentations of BPD (NQ, D-12) or have limited validity (Short Evaluation of Breathing Questionnaire).

    “Some patient-­ reported outcome measures are not validated in all presentations of BPD (NQ, 15 D-­ 12 29 ) or have limited validity (Short Evaluation of Breathing Questionniare 30 ).”

    From Physiotherapy assessment of breathing pattern disorder: a qualitative evaluation (2023) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Methods and Study two validation sections report development in patients with COPD, interstitial lung disease and chronic heart failure, followed by a separate validation study in patients with COPD. This supports a limited validation scope for the D-12, but the paper does not assess presentations of BPD or establish whether the measure has been validated in any of them. The NQ and Short Evaluation of Breathing Questionnaire are attributed to other citations in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • More recent instruments, such as Dyspnea-12 and the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile, permit the assessment of both the presence and intensity of the descriptor.

    “More recent instruments, such as Dyspnea-12 24 and the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile, 25 permit the assessment of both the presence and intensity of the descriptor.”
  • The D-12 allows assessment of the sensory and emotional components of dyspnoea, which is recommended by international scientific societies for dyspnoea evaluation.

    “D-12,46,58 used in our study, allows the assessment of the sensory and emotional components of dyspnoea, which is recommended by international scientific societies for dyspnea evaluation.59”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [12]Banzett RB Moosavi SH Dyspnea and pain: similarities and contrasts between two very unpleasant sensations. Am Pain Soc Bull 2001; 11: 6– 8

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yorke, J., Moosavi, S. H., Shuldham, C., & Jones, P. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Salford (GB)
  • Charing Cross Hospital (GB)
  • Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • St George's, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Yorke, J
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-12-08
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
21-26
ISSN
0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2101443745
Cited by
369
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 12
FWCI
9.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Thorax (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • St George's Online Research Archive (St George's University of London) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Salford Institutional Repository (University of Salford) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust
  • Action Medical Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
dyspnea, symptom assessment, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, interstitial lung disease, chronic heart failure, Rasch analysis, psychometric validation, anxiety and depression
MeSH terms
Aged, Anxiety Disorders, Chronic Disease, Depressive Disorder, Disability Evaluation, Dyspnea, Epidemiologic Methods, Female, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Terminology as Topic, Psychometrics, Lung Diseases, Interstitial, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive

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