Towards Optimum Reporting of Pulmonary Effectiveness Databases and Outcomes (TORPEDO): identifying a core dataset for asthma and COPD studies
van Boven, J. F.; Lucas, S. J.; Parker, G.; Kaplan, A.; Trofor, A.; Bonevski, B.; Kirenga, B. J.; Ryan, D.; Pizzichini, E.; van Ganse, E.; Huang, E. W.-C.; Brakema, E.; Gould, G.; Kocks, J.; Alison, J.; Quint, J. K.; Soriano, J. B.; Hurst, J. R.; Siddiqi, K.; Boydell, K.; Miravitlles, M.; Flores-Valdez, M. A.; Kasteleyn, M.; FitzGerald, M.; Boeckmann, M.; Chaiton, M.; Roman Rodriguez, M.; Kulkarni, M.; Roche, N.; Chavannes, N.; Papadopoulos, N. G.; Behrakis, P.; Dennis, S.; Bassi, S.; Williams, S.; Maher, T. M.; Siddharthan, T.; Kamath, V.; Verhamme, K. M.; the REG/GACD TORPEDO collaborators,
Show abstract
PurposeThere remains a need for a standardized dataset for respiratory studies to accelerate data collection, improve research efficiency and aid the sharing, merging and comparison of datasets. This TORPEDO (Towards Optimum Reporting of Pulmonary Effectiveness Databases and Outcomes) project aimed to develop a checklist of optimum and minimum variables for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) research. MethodsA 3-phase modified Delphi survey was conducted: in phase 1, an expert panel generated a list of variables, in phase 2 a Delphi panel selected the minimum variables (>66% agreement) for any design and in phase 3 they were asked to select a minimum set for specific study designs. ResultsIn phase 1 the expert panel (n=22) proposed 224 variables. In phase 2, voting by 64 participants resulted in consensus (>66% agreement) for 18 variables and partial agreement (50-66%) for 44 variables, following this, 5 technical variables (e.g. date of test) were removed. In phase 3, 34 members of the Delphi panel completed voting; consensus was reached for 13 variables for retrospective asthma studies and 34 for prospective asthma studies. For COPD, there were 16 variables for retrospective studies and 37 for prospective studies. Gender, asthma/COPD exacerbations and patient-reported outcomes were the only variables with 100% agreement for both asthma and COPD studies. ConclusionThe proposed list of minimally required variables will allow the assessment of current data sources for their utility in asthma and COPD studies, facilitate the merging of datasets, aid standardization of data collection and improve research efficiency.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Turning green: the impact of changing to more eco-friendly respiratory healthcare. A carbon and cost analysis of Dutch prescription data 93%
- COVID-19 Advanced Respiratory Care Educational Training Program for Healthcare Workers in Lesotho: An Observational Study 91%
- Helmet noninvasive ventilation for COVID-19 patients (Helmet-COVID): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Long-Term Acceptability of Hygiene, Face Covering, and Social Distancing Interventions to Prevent Exacerbations in people living with Airways Diseases 93%
- Adrenaline (epinephrine) compared to selective beta-2-agonist in adults or children with acute asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis 93%
- Optimised oxygenation improves functional capacity during daily activities in patients with COPD on long-term oxygen therapy – a randomised crossover trial 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Mind the gap: Mapping Variation between National and Local Clinical Practice Guidelines for Acute Paediatric Asthma from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands 95%
- Reduction in COPD exacerbations during COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis 94%
- Combination of ipratropium bromide and salbutamol in children and adolescents with asthma: a meta-analysis 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Rethinking Blood Eosinophils for Assessing ICS Response in COPD: A Post-Hoc Analysis from FLAME 91%
- Immediate, remote smoking cessation intervention in participants undergoing a targeted lung health check: QuLIT2 a randomised controlled trial 88%
- Development and Prospective Validation of a Transparent Deep Learning Algorithm for Predicting Need for Mechanical Ventilation 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.