| MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES | |
| Limitations | |
| Observations | |
| 1. RELIABILITY | |
| A. Internal Consistency | Tested |
| Cronbach's (Describe) |
Cronbach’s α was adequate, ranging from 0.86 to 0.92, in the original validation study |
| B. Reliability intraobserver or test-retest | Tested |
| Continuous scores: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) Dichotomus: Cohen kappa (Describe) |
Cohen’s κ was 0.92 after a time interval range of 1 to 27 days (median: 8 days) in a preoperative surgery cohort |
| C. Reliability interobserver or Measurement error | Not Tested |
| Standard error of measurement (SEM), smallest detectable change (SDC) or Limits of agreement (LoA) (Describe) |
|
| 2. VALIDITY | |
| A. Content validity: face validity | Tested |
| Expert opinion (relevance and comprehensiveness) (Describe) |
The BQ was developed based on expert consensus using questions that were selected from the literature to elicit factors or behaviors that consistently predicted sleep-disordered breathing. Questions review snoring, fatigue/tiredness, and comorbidities (obesity, hypertension) associated with higher risk for OSA, and therefore the BQ has high face validity |
| B. Construct Validity: Structural validity |
Not Tested |
| Hypotheses-testing | Tested |
| Cross-cultural validity | Tested |
| Brief Description | |
| C. Criterion validity | Tested |
| Comparison with a 'gold standard' Continuous scores: correlations, ROC curves Dichotomus: Sensitivity & Specificity (Describe) |
The criterion validation cohort was drawn from 100 patients seen for any indication from five primary care practice sites. A portable home monitor was used to detect a respiratory disturbance event defined as 1) a decrease in nasal or oral airflow, alone or with chest wall movement that lasted for 10 seconds or more, or 2) a decrease in oxygen saturation of 4% or more. From this information, a respiratory disturbance index (RDI) (measured as the number of respiratory events per hour in bed) was generated, and a higher mean RDI was seen in the BQ high-risk group (21.1 ± 18.5) compared with the BQ low-risk group (4.7 ± 7.0). For the RDI cutoff of greater than 5, the sensitivity of the BQ for identifying the high-risk group was 86% and the specificity was 77%. For the RDI cutoff of greater than 15, sensitivity was 54% and specificity was 97% |