Dataset Information

COVID-Q: Validation of the first COVID-19 questionnaire based on patient-rated symptom gravity.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to develop and validate the CoronaVirus-Disease-2019 (COVID-19) Questionnaire (COVID-Q), a novel symptom questionnaire specific for COVID-19 patients, to provide a comprehensive evaluation that may be helpful for physicians, and evaluate the questionnaire's performance in identifying subjects at higher risk of testing positive.

Materials and methods

Consecutive non-hospitalised adults who underwent nasopharyngeal-throat swab for severe-acute-respiratory-syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection at Treviso Hospital in March 2020, were enrolled. Subjects were divided into positive (cases) and negative (controls). All subjects answered the COVID-Q. Patients not able to answer COVID-Q because of clinical conditions were excluded. Parallel Analysis and Principal Component Analysis identified items measuring the same dimension. The Item Response Theory (IRT)-based analyses evaluated the functioning of item categories, the presence of clusters of local dependence among items, item fit within the model and model fit to the data.

Results

Answers obtained from 230 cases (113 males; mean age 55 years, range 20-99) and 230 controls (61 males; mean age 46 years, range 21-89) were analysed. Six components were extracted with parallel analysis: asthenia, influenza-like symptoms, ear and nose symptoms, breathing issues, throat symptoms, and anosmia/ageusia. The final IRT models retained 27 items as significant for symptom assessment. The total questionnaire's score was significantly associated with positivity to the molecular test: subjects with multiple symptoms were more likely to be affected (P < .001). Older age, male gender presence of breathing issues and anosmia/ageusia were significantly related to positivity (P < .001). Comorbidities had not a significant association with the COVID-19 diagnosis.

Conclusion

COVID-Q could be validated since the evaluated aspects were overall significantly related to infection. The application of the questionnaire to clinical practice may help to identify subjects who are likely to be affected by COVID-19 and address them to a nasopharyngeal swab in order to achieve an early diagnosis.

SUBMITTER: Spinato G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8646717 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

COVID-Q: Validation of the first COVID-19 questionnaire based on patient-rated symptom gravity.

Spinato Giacomo G Fabbris Cristoforo C Conte Federica F Menegaldo Anna A Franz Leonardo L Gaudioso Piergiorgio P Cinetto Francesco F Agostini Carlo C Costantini Giulio G Boscolo-Rizzo Paolo P

International journal of clinical practice 20210922 12

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of the present study was to develop and validate the CoronaVirus-Disease-2019 (COVID-19) Questionnaire (COVID-Q), a novel symptom questionnaire specific for COVID-19 patients, to provide a comprehensive evaluation that may be helpful for physicians, and evaluate the questionnaire's performance in identifying subjects at higher risk of testing positive.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Consecutive non-hospitalised adults who underwent nasopharyngeal-throat swab for severe-a ...[more]

PMID: 34510668

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) was developed as a wrist joint specific measure of pain and disability and evidence of sound validity has been accumulated through classical psychometric methods. Rasch analysis (RA) has been endorsed as a newer method for analyzing the clinical measurement properties of self-report outcome measures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the PRWE using Rasch modeling.MethodsWe employed the Rasch model to assess overall fit, response scaling, individual item fit, differential item functioning (DIF), local dependency, unidimensionality and person separation index (PSI). A convenience sample of 382 patients with distal radius fracture was recruited from the hand and upper limb clinic at large academic healthcare organization, London, Ontario, Canada, 6-month post-injury scores of the PRWE was used. RA was conducted on the 3 subscales (pain, specific activities, and usual activities) of the PRWE separately.ResultsThe pain subscale adequately fit the Rasch model when item 4 "Pain - When it is at its worst" was deleted to eliminate non-uniform DIF by age group, and item 5 "How often do you have pain" was rescored by collapsing into 8 intervals to eliminate disordered thresholds. Uniform DIF for "Use my affected hand to push up from the chair" (by work status) and "Use bathroom tissue with my affected hand" (by injured hand) was addressed by splitting the items for analysis. After background rescoring of 2 items in pain subscale, 2 items in specific activities and 3 items in usual activities, all three subscales of the PRWE were well targeted and had high reliability (PSI = 0.86). These changes provided a unidimensional, interval-level scaled measure.ConclusionLike a previous analysis of the Patient-Rated Wrist and Hand Evaluation, this study found the PRWE could be fit to the Rasch model with rescoring of multiple items. However, the modifications required to achieve fit were not the same across studies, our fit statistics also suggested one of the pain items should be deleted. This study adds to the pool of evidence supporting the PRWE, but cannot confidently provide a Rasch-based scoring algorithm.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of health literacy to make informed preventive decisions. A specific COVID-19 health literacy questionnaire (CHL-Q) is included in the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring WHO initiative to conduct behavioral insights studies related to COVID-19. The objective was to assess the psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the COVID-19 Health Literacy Questionnaire (CHL-Q).MethodsData quality, acceptability, internal consistency, and construct and structural validity were analyzed. A Rasch analysis was also performed. This cross-sectional, observational study was conducted on the Spanish general population after the first wave of the pandemic and after the end of the general lockdown by an online survey agency. 1033 participants (inclusion criteria were being 18 years or older and living in Spain), was extracted from a panel of approximately 982,000 participants. The sampling was stratified matching the Spanish general population in terms of age, gender, and area of residence. The CHL-Q includes 9 items and assesses people's knowledge, motivation and competencies to access, understand, evaluate, and apply information about COVID-19 in order to make informed decisions.ResultsCHL-Q index presented a mean of 33.89 (SD = 9.4), and good fit to the Rasch model (χ2(32) = 34.672, p = 0.342, person separation index = 0.77), with ordered thresholds, unidimensionality, item local independence, and no item bias by sex, age or education level. The CHL-Q showed significant different scores by level of education, experience of infection, confusion related to COVID-19 information and adherence to preventive measures. We found a statistically significant correlation between the CHL-Q index and the total number of preventive measures adopted, COVID-19 knowledge, and information seeking behaviour. The Cronbach´s alpha was 0.87 and the item total corrected correlation, 0.49-0.68.ConclusionsThe Spanish version of CHL-Q is a short, adequate, and reliable instrument to measure COVID-19 related health literacy in the Spanish general population. Measuring the CHL in the population can be useful to evaluate whether public authorities, media and the medical and scientific community have been able to reach the population to offer the information in the terms they need it.

Project description:BackgroundQuestionnaires are used in research and clinical practice. For gastrointestinal complaints the Rome II questionnaire is internationally known but not validated. The aim of this study was to validate a printed and a computerized version of Rome II, translated into Swedish. Results from various analyses are reported.MethodsVolunteers from a population based colonoscopy study were included (n = 1011), together with patients seeking general practice (n = 45) and patients visiting a gastrointestinal specialists' clinic (n = 67). The questionnaire consists of 38 questions concerning gastrointestinal symptoms and complaints. Diagnoses are made after a special code. Our validation included analyses of the translation, feasibility, predictability, reproducibility and reliability. Kappa values and overall agreement were measured. The factor structures were confirmed using a principal component analysis and Cronbach's alpha was used to test the internal consistency.Results and discussionTranslation and back translation showed good agreement. The questionnaire was easy to understand and use. The reproducibility test showed kappa values of 0.60 for GERS, 0.52 for FD, and 0.47 for IBS. Kappa values and overall agreement for the predictability when the diagnoses by the questionnaire were compared to the diagnoses by the clinician were 0.26 and 90% for GERS, 0.18 and 85% for FD, and 0.49 and 86% for IBS. Corresponding figures for the agreement between the printed and the digital version were 0.50 and 92% for GERS, 0.64 and 95% for FD, and 0.76 and 95% for IBS. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for GERS was 0.75 with a span per item of 0.71 to 0.76. For FD the figures were 0.68 and 0.54 to 0.70 and for IBS 0.61 and 0.56 to 0.66. The Rome II questionnaire has never been thoroughly validated before even if diagnoses made by the Rome criteria have been compared to diagnoses made in clinical practice.ConclusionThe accuracy of the Swedish version of the Rome II is of doubtful value for clinical practice and research. The results for reproducibility and reliability were acceptable but the outcome of the predictability test was poor with IBS as an exception. The agreement between the digital and the paper questionnaire was good.

Project description:ObjectiveTo describe the development and validation of a novel patient reported outcome measure for symptom burden from long covid, the symptom burden questionnaire for long covid (SBQ-LC).DesignMultiphase, prospective mixed methods study.SettingRemote data collection and social media channels in the United Kingdom, 14 April to 1 August 2021.Participants13 adults (aged ≥18 years) with self-reported long covid and 10 clinicians evaluated content validity. 274 adults with long covid field tested the draft questionnaire.Main outcome measuresPublished systematic reviews informed development of SBQ-LC's conceptual framework and initial item pool. Thematic analysis of transcripts from cognitive debriefing interviews and online clinician surveys established content validity. Consensus discussions with the patient and public involvement group of the Therapies for Long COVID in non-hospitalised individuals: From symptoms, patient reported outcomes and immunology to targeted therapies (TLC Study) confirmed face validity. Rasch analysis of field test data guided item and scale refinement and provided initial evidence of the SBQ-LC's measurement properties.ResultsSBQ-LC (version 1.0) is a modular instrument measuring patient reported outcomes and is composed of 17 independent scales with promising psychometric properties. Respondents rate their symptom burden during the past seven days using a dichotomous response or 4 point rating scale. Each scale provides coverage of a different symptom domain and returns a summed raw score that can be transformed to a linear (0-100) score. Higher scores represent higher symptom burden. After rating scale refinement and item reduction, all scales satisfied the Rasch model requirements for unidimensionality (principal component analysis of residuals: first residual contrast values <2.00 eigenvalue units) and item fit (outfit mean square values within 0.5 -1.5 logits). Rating scale categories were ordered with acceptable category fit statistics (outfit mean square values <2.0 logits). 14 item pairs had evidence of local dependency (residual correlation values >0.4). Across the 17 scales, person reliability ranged from 0.34 to 0.87, person separation ranged from 0.71 to 2.56, item separation ranged from 1.34 to 13.86, and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) ranged from 0.56 to 0.91.ConclusionsSBQ-LC (version 1.0) is a comprehensive patient reported outcome instrument developed using modern psychometric methods. It measures symptoms of long covid important to people with lived experience of the condition and may be used to evaluate the impact of interventions and inform best practice in clinical management.

Project description:Background and aimCOVID-19 affected mental health and wellbeing. Research is needed to assess its impact using validated tools. The study assessed the content validity, reliability and dimensionality of a multidimensional tool for assessing the mental health and wellbeing of adults.MethodsAn online questionnaire collected data in the second half of 2020 from adults in different countries. The questionnaire included nine sections assessing: COVID-19 experience and sociodemographic profile; health and memory; pandemic stress (pandemic stress index, PSI); financial and lifestyle impact; social support; post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); coping strategies; self-care and HIV profile over 57 questions. Content validity was assessed (content validity index, CVI) and participants evaluated the test-retest reliability (Kappa statistic and intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC). Internal consistency of scales was assessed (Cronbach α). The dimensionality of the PSI sections and self-care strategies was assessed by multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) using all responses and SPSS. For qualitative validation, we used a semi-structured interview and NVivo was used for coding and thematic analysis.ResultsThe overall CVI = 0.83 with lower values for the memory items. Cronbach α for the memory items = 0.94 and ICC = 0.71. Cronbach α for PTSD items was 0.93 and ICC = 0.89. Test-retest scores varied by section. The 2-dimensions solution of MCA for the PSI behavior section explained 33.6% (precautionary measures dimension), 11.4% (response to impact dimension) and overall variance = 45%. The 2-dimensions of the PSI psychosocial impact explained 23.5% (psychosocial impact of the pandemic dimension), 8.3% (psychosocial impact of the precautionary measures of the pandemic dimension) and overall variance = 31.8%. The 2-dimensions of self-care explained 32.9% (dimension of self-care strategies by people who prefer to stay at home and avoid others), 9% (dimension of self-care strategies by outward-going people) and overall variance = 41.9%. Qualitative analysis showed that participants agreed that the multidimensional assessment assessed the effect of the pandemic and that it was better suited to the well-educated.ConclusionThe questionnaire has good content validity and can be used to assess the impact of the pandemic in cross-sectional studies especially as individual items. The PSI and self-care strategies need revision to ensure the inclusion of items with strong discrimination.

Dataset Information

COVID-Q: Validation of the first COVID-19 questionnaire based on patient-rated symptom gravity.

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

COVID-Q: Validation of the first COVID-19 questionnaire based on patient-rated symptom gravity.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets