Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 9.0 (SPSS Inc, USA). Data are expressed as medians (range) unless stated otherwise. Internal consistency of the CCQ was evaluated by determining the Cronbach's α coefficient (for the three domains and the total questionnaire). Non parametrical testing (Mann-Whitney U test) was used to determine the discriminant validity of the CCQ to differentiate among healthy (ex) smokers, patients with COPD (stages 0 to III). Spearman's rank correlations were used to examine convergent (HRQoL) and divergent (lung function) validity. Test-retest reliability analysis was done by calculating the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). Responsiveness was tested using the Wilcoxon U test. A p value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. A priori assumptions of the relations between the CCQ and convergent and divergent measures were made by the research team in advance of the validation study
Protocol detail
Validating the Clinical COPD Questionnaire
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol.
The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Corresponding Organization :
Other organizations : University of Groningen, McMaster University, Hamilton Health Sciences
Top 5 similar protocols
Protocol cited in 20 other protocols
Variable analysis
independent variables
- Smoking status (healthy (ex) smokers, patients with COPD (stages 0 to III))
- Internal consistency of the CCQ (Cronbach's α coefficient for the three domains and the total questionnaire)
- Discriminant validity of the CCQ (to differentiate among healthy (ex) smokers and patients with COPD (stages 0 to III))
- Convergent validity (with HRQoL)
- Divergent validity (with lung function)
- Test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC))
- Responsiveness (Wilcoxon U test)
- Not explicitly mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
Sign up for free or login to display all annotations
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!