RESEARCH ARTICLE
Content Validity of the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases: An International Delphi Survey
Andrea Jobst 1, 2, Inge Kirchberger*, 1, 2, Alarcos Cieza 1, 2, 3, 4, Gerold Stucki 2, 4, 5, Armin Stucki 6, 7
Article Information
Identifiers and Pagination:
Year: 2013Volume: 7
First Page: 33
Last Page: 45
Publisher ID: TORMJ-7-33
DOI: 10.2174/1874306401307010033
Article History:
Received Date: 6/6/2012Revision Received Date: 5/8/2012
Acceptance Date: 14/8/2012
Electronic publication date: 5/4/2013
Collection year: 2013

open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.
Abstract
Introduction:
The “Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases (COPD)“ is an application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and represents the typical spectrum of problems in functioning of patients with COPD. The objective of this study was to validate this ICF Core Set from the perspective of physicians.
Materials and Methodology:
Physicians experienced in COPD treatment were asked about the patients’ problems treated by physicians in patients with COPD in a three-round electronic mail survey using the Delphi technique. Responses were linked to the ICF.
Results:
Seventy-six physicians in 44 countries gave a total of 1330 responses that were linked to 148 different ICF categories. Nine ICF categories were not represented in the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for COPD although at least 75% of the participants have rated them as important. Nineteen concepts were linked to the not yet developed ICF component personal factors and seventeen concepts were not covered by the ICF.
Conclusion:
The high percentage of ICF categories represented in the ICF Core Set for COPD indicates satisfactory content validity from the perspective of the physicians. However, some issues were raised that were not covered and need to be investigated further.