| Title |
A systematic review to examine the relationship between objective and patient‐reported outcome measures in sinonasal disorders: recommendations for use in research and clinical practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology, January 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1002/alr.22744 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ngan Hong Ta, Jack Gao, Carl Philpott |
| Abstract |
Common sinonasal disorders include chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), allergic rhinitis (AR), and a deviated nasal septum (DNS), which often coexist with shared common symptoms including nasal obstruction, olfactory dysfunction, and rhinorrhea. Various objective outcome measures and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess disease severity; however, there is limited evidence in the literature on the correlation between them. This systematic review aims to examine the relationship between them and provide recommendations. A search of MEDLINE and EMBASE identified studies quantifying correlations between objective outcome measures and PROMs for the sinonasal conditions using a narrative synthesis. In total, 59 studies met inclusion criteria. For nasal obstruction, rhinomanometry shows a lack of correlation whereas peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) shows the strongest correlation with PROMs (r > 0.5). The Sniffin' Stick test shows a stronger correlation with PROMs (r > 0.5) than the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) (r < 0.5). Computed tomography (CT) sinus scores show little evidence of correlation with PROMs and nasal endoscopic ratings (weak correlation, r < 0.5). Overall, objective outcome measures and PROMs assessing sinonasal symptoms are poorly correlated, and we recommend that objective outcome measures be used with validated PROMs depending on the setting. PNIF should be used in routine clinical practice for nasal obstruction; rhinomanometry and acoustic rhinometry may be useful in research. The Sniffin' Sticks test is recommended for olfactory dysfunction with UPSIT as an alternative. CT scores should be excluded as a routine CRS outcome measure, and endoscopic scores should be used in combination with PROMs until further research is conducted. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 30% |
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| Greece | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 30% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 30% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 20% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 14 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 27 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 14 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 31 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1033. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2021.
All research outputs
#14,901
of 25,084,886 outputs
Outputs from International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology
#2
of 1,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#572
of 517,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology
#1
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,084,886 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,861 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 517,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.