FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2049153486> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2049153486 abstract "The diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is primarily dependent upon symptoms reported by patients. Therefore, several types of questionnaires have been suggested for the diagnosis of GERD and assessment of treatment satisfaction. However, few of standardized questionnaires can be used in the clinical study restrictively due to the lack of validity, reliability and feasibility. The frequency scale for symptoms of GERD (FSSG) was developed by Kusano et al1 in 2004, based on Japanese studies of GERD. The FSSG is composed of twelve questions with cut off score of 8, and this method showed sensitivity of 62% and specificity of 59%. The FSSG is suitable for evaluating frequency of typical reflux symptoms. Quality of life and utility evaluation survey technology (QUEST) was suggested as a method of self-administered questionnaire for the diagnosis of GERD.2 The QUEST is comprised of 7 items and reports sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 46% at the cut-off score of 4. The QUEST includes more specified questions on the precipitating, exacerbating and relieving factors of GERD. In the previous comparative study of FSSG with QUEST, there was no difference in sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for GERD.3 Nonaka et al4 reported an interesting comparative study regarding the feasibility between 2 questionnaires, QUEST and FSSG. They measured the time taken to complete the questionnaire and counted the number of patients who asked any questions when they filled in the questionnaire. Completion for the QUEST took much longer than for the FSSG, and questions of QUEST were more complicated than those of FSSG. Based on these results, comparative study concluded the FSSG was a more convenient method for clinical use than the QUEST. Results of this study could demonstrate that simplicity is an important feature of a questionnaire and it should be considered critically in future studies. Nevertheless, I would like to make comments on this study. First, since time and number of patients asking questions are indirect parameters of feasibility, there are so many confounding factors such as educational status of subjects, the language of original questionnaire (translation into Japanese might be responsible for large number of characters and difficulty in understanding), introverted personality (do not want to ask questions) and so on. Therefore, it would be to ask more direct questions, such as which one do you like better and which questionnaire was easier to understand.5 Second, 2 questionnaires have quite different questions. QUEST focuses on influencing factors in GERD and FSSG emphasizes on symptom frequency. Therefore, although feasibility is important, considerations on types of questions are needed when we choose a questionnaire." @default.
• W2049153486 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2049153486 creator A5005962936 @default.
• W2049153486 date "2013-01-31" @default.
• W2049153486 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2049153486 title "Is Easier the Better in a Feasibility Study of Questionnaires?" @default.
• W2049153486 cites W1990023347 @default.
• W2049153486 cites W2011280345 @default.
• W2049153486 cites W2046511261 @default.
• W2049153486 cites W2071128887 @default.
• W2049153486 cites W2127395151 @default.
• W2049153486 doi "https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm.2013.19.1.3" @default.
• W2049153486 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3548123" @default.
• W2049153486 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23350041" @default.
• W2049153486 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2049153486 type Work @default.
• W2049153486 sameAs 2049153486 @default.
• W2049153486 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2049153486 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2049153486 hasAuthorship W2049153486A5005962936 @default.
• W2049153486 hasBestOaLocation W20491534861 @default.
• W2049153486 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W2049153486 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2049153486 hasConceptScore W2049153486C19527891 @default.
• W2049153486 hasConceptScore W2049153486C71924100 @default.
• W2049153486 hasLocation W20491534861 @default.
• W2049153486 hasLocation W20491534862 @default.
• W2049153486 hasLocation W20491534863 @default.
• W2049153486 hasLocation W20491534864 @default.
• W2049153486 hasOpenAccess W2049153486 @default.
• W2049153486 hasPrimaryLocation W20491534861 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W1506200166 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W2039318446 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W2048182022 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W2080531066 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W2604872355 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W2998699411 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W3032375762 @default.
• W2049153486 hasRelatedWork W3108674512 @default.
• W2049153486 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2049153486 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2049153486 magId "2049153486" @default.
• W2049153486 workType "article" @default.