The Intestinal Gas Questionnaire: development of a new instrument for measuring gas‐related symptoms and their impact on daily life

Chassany, Olivier; Tugaut, Béatrice; Marrel, Alexia; Guyonnet, Denis; Arbuckle, Rob; Duracinský, Martin; Whorwell, Peter J.; Azpiroz, Fernando

doi:10.1111/nmo.12565

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(81 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The seven-day recall was considered more appropriate for measuring symptoms in subjects with relatively stable symptoms, while those with variable symptoms or undergoing treatment and expecting rapid change may need the shorter one-day recall period to accurately reflect changes in symptoms [ 51 , 52 ]. Discussions indicated an assumption that one-day recall instruments would be repeatedly administered, with respondents raising the issue of burden of completing the questionnaire on consecutive days [ 53 , 54 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review of the Effect of a One-Day Versus Seven-Day Recall Duration on Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)

Peasgood

Caruana

Mukuria

2023

Patient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is ongoing uncertainty around the most suitable recall period for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Method This systematic review integrates quantitative and qualitative literature across health, economics, and psychology to explore the effect of a one-day (or '24-h') versus seven-day (or 'one week') recall period. The following databases were searched from database inception to 30 November 2021: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, EconLit, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Library, and Sociological Abstracts. Studies were included that compared a one-day (or '24-h') versus seven-day (or weekly) recall period condition on patient-reported scores for PROM and Health-Related Quality-of-Life (HRQoL) instrument scores in adult populations (aged 18 and above) or combined paediatric and adult populations with a majority of respondents aged over 18 years. Studies were excluded if they assessed health behaviours only, used ecological momentary assessment to derive an index of daily recall, or incorporated clinician reports of patient symptoms. We extracted results relevant to six domains with generic health relevance: physical functioning, pain, cognition, psychosocial wellbeing, sleep-related symptoms and aggregated disease-specific signs and symptoms. Quantitative studies compared weekly recall scores with the mean or maximum score over the last seven days or with the same-day recall score. Results Overall, across the 24 quantitative studies identified, 158 unique results were identified. Symptoms tended to be reported as more severe and HRQoL lower when assessed with a weekly recall than a one-day recall. A narrative synthesis of 33 qualitative studies integrated patient perspectives on the suitability of a one-day versus seven-day recall period for assessing health state or quality of life. Participants had mixed preferences, some noted the accuracy of recall for the one-day period but others preferred the seven-day recall for conditions characterised by high symptom variability, or where PROMs concepts required integration of infrequent experiences or functioning over time. Conclusion This review identified a clear trend toward higher symptom scores and worse quality of life being reported for a seven-day compared to a one-day recall. The review also identified anomalies in this pattern for some wellbeing items and a need for further research on positively framed items. A better understanding of the impact of using different recall periods within PROMs and HRQoL instruments will help contextualise future comparisons between instruments. Plain English SummaryQuestionnaires ask patients about their health over different time periods (e.g., "what were your symptoms like over the last week?" versus "what were your symptoms like today?"). Studies find that people may report their symptoms as more severe when they are asked to think about their symptoms over the last week compared to the last day. Understanding how different time periods influence patient responses will allow researchers to compar...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review of the Effect of a One-Day Versus Seven-Day Recall Duration on Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)

Peasgood

Caruana

Mukuria

2023

Patient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors of the questionnaire had expertise in qualitative research (MD, OC) [21, 22] and in medical writing (MD, OC, FP). The prototype electronic questionnaire was tested on 11 AP-HP medical doctors to check acceptability and comprehensiveness.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to publishing in biomedical journals perceived by a sample of French researchers: results of the DIAzePAM study

Duracinský

Lalanne

Rous³

et al. 2017

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAs publishing is essential but competitive for researchers, difficulties in writing and submitting medical articles to biomedical journals are disabling. The DIAzePAM (Difficultés des Auteurs à la Publication d’Articles Médicaux) survey aimed to assess the difficulties experienced by researchers in the AP-HP (Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris, i.e., Paris Hospitals Board, France), the largest public health institution in Europe, when preparing articles for biomedical journals. The survey also aimed to assess researchers’ satisfaction and perceived needs.MethodsA 39-item electronic questionnaire based on qualitative interviews was addressed by e-mail to all researchers registered in the AP-HP SIGAPS (Système d’Interrogation, de Gestion et d’Analyse des Publications Scientifiques) bibliometric database.ResultsBetween 28 May and 15 June 2015, 7766 researchers should have received and read the e-mail, and 1191 anonymously completed the questionnaire (<45 years of age: 63%; women: 55%; physician: 81%; with PhD or Habilitation à Diriger des recherches––accreditation to direct research––: 45%). 94% of respondents had published at least one article in the previous 2 years. 76% of respondents felt they were not publishing enough, mainly because of lack of time to write (79%) or submit (27%), limited skills in English (40%) or in writing (32%), and difficulty in starting writing (35%). 87% of respondents would accept technical support, especially in English reediting (79%), critical reediting (63%), formatting (52%), and/or writing (41%), to save time (92%) and increase high-impact-factor journal submission and acceptance (75%). 79% of respondents would appreciate funding support for their future publications, for English reediting (56%), medical writing (21%), or publication (38%) fees. They considered that this funding support could be covered by AP-HP (73%) and/or by the added financial value obtained by their department from previous publications (56%).ConclusionsThe DIAzePAM survey highlights difficulties experienced by researchers preparing articles for biomedical journals, and details room for improvement.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0371-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…It is possible that this pressure difference could cause pain (e.g. trapped gas in humans 43 ) and may put considerable additional strain on internal tissues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Boyle’s Law ignores dynamic processes in governing barotrauma in fish

Kerr,

White,

Leighton

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The expansion and potential rupture of the swim bladder due to rapid decompression, a major cause of barotrauma injury in fish that pass through turbines and pumps, is generally assumed to be governed by Boyle’s Law. In this study, two swim bladder expansion models are presented and tested in silico. One based on the quasi-static Boyle’s Law, and a Modified Rayleigh Plesset Model (MRPM), which includes both inertial and pressure functions and was parametrised to be representative of a fish swim bladder. The two models were tested using a range of: (1) simulated and (2) empirically derived pressure profiles. Our results highlight a range of conditions where the Boyle’s Law model (BLM) is inappropriate for predicting swim bladder size in response to pressure change and that these conditions occur in situ, indicating that this is an applied and not just theoretical issue. Specifically, these conditions include any one, or any combination, of the following factors: (1) when rate of pressure change is anything but very slow compared to the resonant frequency of the swim bladder; (2) when the nadir pressure is near or at absolute zero; and (3) when a fish experiences liquid tensions (i.e. negative absolute pressures). Under each of these conditions, the MRPM is more appropriate tool for predicting swim bladder size in response to pressure change and hence it is a better model for quantifying barotrauma in fish.

show abstract

The Intestinal Gas Questionnaire: development of a new instrument for measuring gas‐related symptoms and their impact on daily life

Cited by 9 publications

References 46 publications

Systematic Review of the Effect of a One-Day Versus Seven-Day Recall Duration on Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)

Systematic Review of the Effect of a One-Day Versus Seven-Day Recall Duration on Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)

Barriers to publishing in biomedical journals perceived by a sample of French researchers: results of the DIAzePAM study

Boyle’s Law ignores dynamic processes in governing barotrauma in fish

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About