Prevalence, severity and impacts of breathlessness in Indian adults: An exploratory, nationally representative, cross-sectional online survey

Slavica Kochovska; Rajam Iyer; Sungwon Chang; Diana Ferreira; Vanessa N. Brunelli; Irina Kinchin; Danny J. Eckert; Joseph Clark; Jacob Sandberg; Magnus Ekström; David Currow; Sujeet Rajan

doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655

Abstract

There are no known estimates of the prevalence, severity and impacts from breathlessness in low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to explore the prevalence, severity, self-attributed underlying conditions and impacts of breathlessness limiting exertion in community-dwelling adults in India. This exploratory, population-based online survey recruited a pre-planned sample of 3,000 adult respondents stratified by age, sex and rurality (quotas as per the 2011 Indian National Census). Measures included: demographics; breathlessness limiting exertion (modified Medical Research [mMRC] scale); health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L); and disability (World Health Organisation’s Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 12-item questionnaire [WHODAS-12]). Respondents (n = 3,046) had a mean age of 38 years (SD 15); 57% were male, 59% lived in rural areas and 33% had completed 12^th grade. Breathlessness limiting exertion (mMRC ≥1) was reported by 44%, mostly attributed to poor nutrition (28%), lung conditions excluding tuberculosis (17%) or anaemia (13%). Compared to those without breathlessness, a higher proportion of people with breathlessness (mMRC ≥1) reported problems across all EQ-5D-5L dimensions. Most people reporting breathlessness (81%) indicated the symptom had adversely affected their normal activities. Disability scores (WHODAS-12 total and individual domains) increased as breathlessness worsened. To conclude, in India, conservative estimates indicate 626 million people live with breathlessness of whom 52 million people live with severe breathlessness. The symptom is associated with poorer health-related quality of life and marked disability, including reduced ability to perform daily activities.

Citation: Kochovska S, Iyer R, Chang S, Ferreira D, Brunelli VN, Kinchin I, et al. (2024) Prevalence, severity and impacts of breathlessness in Indian adults: An exploratory, nationally representative, cross-sectional online survey. PLOS Glob Public Health 4(5): e0002655. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655

Editor: Allison Martin, The George Institute for Global Health, UNSW, AUSTRALIA

Received: October 23, 2023; Accepted: March 26, 2024; Published: May 2, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Kochovska et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: The questionnaire used in this survey is publicly available from https://osf.io/c7rbe/. The data are not freely available. Requests for data sharing will be considered by the authorship team. Requests should be directed to Professor David Currow at dcurrow@uow.edu.au in the first instance and will be contingent on ethics approval from the University of Wollongong Human Research Ethics Committee (Tel: +61 (0)2 4221 4457; Email: rso-ethics@uow.edu.au) and the Bhatia Hospital Medical Research Society Ethics Committee (Tel: +91 (22) 6666 0000; Fax: +91 (22) 6666 0566).

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: DCC is an unpaid member of an advisory board for Helsinn Pharmaceuticals and Specialist Therapeutics, and has consulted to, and received intellectual property payments from Mayne Pharma. DJE is funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Leadership Fellowship (1116942). Outside the current work, DJE has received research grants from Bayer, Takeda, Invicta Medical, Withings, Eli Lilly, and Apnimed and has served on Scientific Advisory Boards for Apnimed, Invicta, Mosanna, and as a consultant for Bayer. All other authors declare no competing interests. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Introduction

Living with the symptom of breathlessness, is one of the most debilitating experiences for people with chronic complex or chronic progressive illnesses [1, 2]. Breathlessness is associated with poorer quality of life, increased anxiety and depression, worsening function and sexual wellbeing, limited activities of daily living, reduced workforce participation and increased social isolation [3–9]. The symptom also has strong negative effects on caregivers and families [10]. Healthcare systems are also affected due to frequent unplanned contact (primary and emergency care) and longer inpatient care [11, 12]. In high income countries (HICs), approximately 10% of adults live with the symptom, with prevalence rates increasing with age, advanced disease and at the end of life [13–15].

In the context of global health, estimates of the prevalence, severity and impacts from breathlessness in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are important, but to date have only included adults over the age of 40 [16]. LMICs account for the highest global burden of illnesses associated with breathlessness (e.g., over 90% of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) live in LMICs [17, 18], with respiratory diseases being the most frequently attributed cause of breathlessness) [19]. Behavioural, workplace and environmental risk factors [20–23], and lack of access to affordable health care [20, 24] are also likely to contribute to prevalence of breathlessness in these settings [25]. As such, breathlessness is likely more frequent and impactful in LMICs, but potentially less visible. Delineating the prevalence and intensity of the symptom of breathlessness and its impacts is critical to help optimise its recognition, and effective assessment and management in these settings.

Much of the research to date in both HICs and LMICs has focused on measuring the impact of disease rather than symptom. The limited available evidence on prevalent symptoms in people with chronic complex or chronic progressive conditions in LMICs, derived mostly from qualitative studies, indicates that breathlessness presents complex and manifold challenges for the person’s physical activity, social interaction with family and friends, quality of life, income (e.g., through inability to work, having to change work or reduce hours worked) and financial burden (e.g., transportation costs to/from health facilities) [20]. Its management may be compromised by poor access to healthcare (even when this may be available), resources and health professionals’ knowledge and beliefs [21, 26]. Thus, population studies that engage with community-dwelling people living with this symptom, independently of healthcare contact, are important to help improve the understanding and evidence base for the quantification and impacts of breathlessness in LMICs. In this respect, population studies that assess breathlessness limiting exertion (henceforth ‘breathlessness’) using the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) breathlessness scale [27] as a critical first step.

In this proof-of-concept study, we chose India, a lower middle-income country (LMIC), as an exemplar to explore the prevalence and impacts of breathlessness in a LMIC setting because of its:

high burden of non-communicable diseases (61.8%) [23] including high prevalence of chronic diseases associated with breathlessness, with COPD indicated in 7% (84.8 million), [28] lung cancer in 5.4% (65.4 million), [29] and cardiovascular diseases in 4.5% (54.4 million) [30] of the population; plus high incidence of tuberculosis (0.21%; 2.95million); [31] and
high rates of smoking (28.6% of adults) [29].

These factors may generate high prevalence rates of breathlessness. India’s high access and usage of internet and mobile technology also means that the symptom and its effects could be investigated at the population level, independently of healthcare contact or utilisation, using web-based approaches that are effective in exploring large-scale health issues [32–34].

Accordingly, the aim of this study was to explore the prevalence, severity, self-attributed underlying conditions and impacts of breathlessness across diverse aspects of personhood in community-dwelling adults in India.

Methods

Design

This was a cross-sectional online survey; questions were defined by the research team and then distributed by a marketing research company (Qualtrics) to adults (≥18 years) in India. Recruitment was not restricted to any state or territory.

A pre-planned convenience sample of 3000 respondents was recruited in line with previous similar population-based surveys in high-income countries, [5] stratified by age, sex and rurality using quotas for each demographic sub-group as identified in the 2011 Indian National Census.

Respondents were invited from the market research company’s double opt-in database of registered, consenting members (n = 9,875,795; of whom 6,559,326 members belong to English-only panels and 3,316,469 members belong to panels that do not report on language ability). Email invitations with a unique survey link were sent to a random sample of registered panel members selected from multiple sources to create a blended sample, reducing the risk of selection bias. The panels meet strict ISO certification requirements, [35, 36] and use rigorous quality screening of potential respondents to ensure their validity [37].

The survey remained open until the required number of respondents for each demographic cell quota completed the survey. Respondents received a financial incentive (USD $2.00–3.50) for their time and participation, with the panels ensuring incentives were competitive and equitable between communities. The survey took approximately 10–15 minutes to complete and was undertaken using a mobile phone, desktop, laptop or tablet.

A Participant Information Sheet with study details was made available to each potential respondent before commencement. Respondents were only able to join the survey after registering their informed consent to participate in the survey and for their data to be used in future research in any de-identified, aggregated form.

Survey development and piloting

The online survey was conducted in English. Measures implemented to ensure that the survey’s content was culturally sensitive and relevant for the population of India included: using validated tools, where possible; constructing questions contextualised to India informed by resident clinical researchers; and piloting the survey questions with randomly selected community members in Mumbai, India to ensure the questions’ feasibility and cognitive interpretation.

The survey was initially piloted with 50 respondents and based on respondent feedback, changes were made to the survey to improve its usability and data accuracy. The pilot was conducted on 23 January, 2023; the survey was conducted between 1–27 February, 2023.

Setting

India is the world’s most populous country, with over 1.4 billion people (36% of whom live in urban areas) [38]. Hindi is the most widely spoken language (57.1% of the population) [39]. English is spoken by approximately 11% of the population (~130 million), the majority of whom speak it as their second or third language [39]. As of 2018, the total literacy rate stands as 74% (82% for males; 66% for females) [40], with significant variation across the country [41]. Internet and mobile usage are sharply rising. As of 2022, 49% of the population used the internet; [42] 1.15 billion cellular mobile connections exist, and it is estimated that mobile connections in India are equivalent to 77% of the country’s population as of January 2023 [42, 43].

Participants

Study participants were English-speaking members of the general population of India, who were registered members of an online panel provider (Qualtrics). All adults who consented to complete the survey were eligible to participate.

Potential participants self-selected to respond to an email invitation for the survey which deliberately did not mention ‘breathlessness’ but referred to ‘questions about health’ (with approval of the ethics committees).

Measures

Self-reported demographics included age; sex; place of residence (urban vs rural) and highest level of education.

Assessment of breathlessness limiting exertion

The presence and severity of breathlessness was assessed using the 5-point ordinal modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) breathlessness scale [27]. The mMRC scale measures the level of exertion before breathlessness limits the respondent’s function, with higher scores indicating worse functional impact. The mMRC was designed for population surveys and has been extensively used in epidemiological and clinical studies [2]. For the purposes of the current analyses, breathlessness limiting exertion (‘breathlessness’) was defined as mMRC ≥1 (‘I get short of breath when hurrying on the level or walking up a slight hill’, or worse). In the survey, a timeframe for the duration of breathlessness was not specified as per the definition of chronic breathlessness [44], nor was breathlessness defined for the respondents.

Respondents who indicated breathlessness of mMRC ≥1 were asked to indicate:

For how long they had experienced: a) that level of breathlessness (months/years); and b) any level of breathlessness (months/years); and
The primary condition to which they attributed their breathlessness (one response allowed from a multiple-choice list, with a free text option); and
To what degree breathlessness affected their normal activities of daily living (‘a lot’; ‘a little’; ‘not at all’) using the London Chest Activities of Daily Living (LCADL) question [45].

Assessment of overall health and wellbeing

Health-related quality of life was assessed using the descriptive and visual analogue scale of the EuroQol five dimensions, five level (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. The five dimensions include mobility, self-care, usual activity, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression, with five levels of severity (no problem, slight, moderate, severe and extreme problems). The EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 and 100 represent the worst and best imaginable health states, respectively.

Disability was assessed using the World Health Organisation’s Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 12-item measure [46]. The WHODAS is a generic assessment tool for health and disability, standardised across conditions, populations and cultures. It assesses levels of functioning in six domains of life (cognition, mobility, self-care, getting along, life activities and participation), with higher scores indicating greater disability (total score range 0–48 [no disability–complete disability]; individual domain scores range 0–8 [no disability–complete disability]).

The survey questions can be accessed at https://osf.io/c7rbe/.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted by a biostatistician (S.C.) and performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, V28.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY; 2016). Demographic characteristics, including education, smoking, duration, and attributed cause of breathlessness were tabulated, and frequency distributions calculated for categorical variables; differences between proportions were evaluated using the Chi-square test.

We employed sample weighting (drawing upon data from the 2011 Census of India)as a technique to rectify disparities in the demographic characteristics within our sample and to enhance its alignment with the broader Indian population. We constrained our focus to the total adult population, who possessed literacy skills, as our sample was derived from respondents to an online survey. Only records within our sample that featured complete demographic data relevant to weight generation were considered. The demographic covariates included in the construction of our survey weights encompassed age, rurality and educational attainment. The variable of sex was deliberately omitted from this weighting process, as our sample’s distribution closely mirrored that of the general population in India.

Within the statistical raking process, we assigned higher weights to under-represented and lower weights to over-represented characteristics in our sample relative to their prevalence in the target population. Comprehensive demographic characteristics in both the pre-weighted and post-weighted samples are available in the Supplementary Materials (S5–S6 Tables).

Subsequently, these study-specific weights were applied to ensure the harmonisation of our study characteristics with their corresponding distributions within the broader general population, thus facilitating a more precise and accurate representation in our analysis.

No data were imputed. Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Wollongong Human Research Ethics Committee (2022/147) and the Bhatia Hospital Medical Research Society Ethics Committee (ECR/388/Inst/MH/2013/RR-19). The study’s reporting follows the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines [47]. Additional information regarding the ethical, cultural, and scientific considerations specific to inclusivity in global research is included in the Supporting Information (S1 Checklist).

Results

The study reports the weighted data. The unweighted data are provided in the Supplementary Materials (S1–S4 Tables).

Demographic characteristics

Included respondents (n = 3,046) had a mean age of 38 years (SD 15); 57% were male, 59% lived in rural areas and 33% had completed 12^th grade. (Table 1) Just over one half reported being non-smokers (51%), while 47% reported a history of smoking; 50% of respondents had been exposed to second-hand smoking in the household.

Download:

Table 1. Characteristics of respondents (n = 3,046) by level of breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research (mMRC) scale [weighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.t001

Breathlessness

Breathlessness (mMRC ≥1) was reported by 44% (1351/3046; Table 1). A larger proportion of women reported being breathless compared to men (X² (1, N = 2983) = 32.3, p < 0.0001). Breathlessness was most frequently attributed to poor nutrition (28%), lung conditions other than tuberculosis (17%) or anaemia (13%). Approximately 12% of respondents did not know what was causing their breathlessness, and 4% attributed the symptom to tuberculosis. Mean duration of any level of breathlessness (mMRC 1–4) experienced was 3.6 years (SD 4.2).

Most severe breathlessness (mMRC 4) was reported by approximately 4% (112/3046), attributed to a heart condition (52%) or poor nutrition (21%). None attributed it to a respiratory condition other than tuberculosis, while 17% did not know the reason for their symptom.

Impacts of breathlessness.

Health-related quality of life. Compared to people without breathlessness, higher proportions of those with breathlessness (mMRC ≥1) reported problems across all EQ-5D-5L five dimensions (Table 2), including moderate-to-severe problems (Fig 1). Every grade within mMRC greater than 0 had higher (worse) scores for quality of life. (Table 2 and Fig 1) People whose activity was more limited by breathlessness (mMRC 4) consistently reported the highest rates of extreme problems.

Download:

Fig 1. Proportion of moderate-to-extreme problems by quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) dimensions and level of breathlessness (modified Medical Research [mMRC] breathlessness scale) reported by 3,046 community-dwelling adults in an online survey for India [weighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.g001

Download:

Table 2. Quality of Life (EQ-5D-5L) by level of breathlessness (measured on the modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] breathlessness scale) for 3,046 respondents to an online survey in India [weighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.t002

The mean EQ-VAS score was 78 (SD 19.9) for the whole population. (Table 2) Surprisingly, better perceived health was reported as breathlessness increased, with people with most severe breathlessness reporting having best perceived health (EQ-VAS mean score 91 [SD 7]).

Activities of daily living. Of the people who reported breathlessness, 81% (1092/1351) indicated the symptom had adversely affected their normal activities to some degree (‘a little/lot’; Table 3), increasing to 98% for those reporting most severe breathlessness. People with mMRC 4 were most likely be impacted by their breathlessness compared to those with mMRC 1–3 (X² (1, N = 1351) = 23.8, p < 0.0001).

Download:

Table 3. Impact of breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC ≥1; n = 1,351) on respondents’ everyday activities reported in an online survey for India [weighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.t003

Disability. The total disability (WHODAS-12) mean score was 20 (SD 11; Table 4). The most compromised disability domains for those reporting breathlessness were Life activities (mMRC 1–2), Participation (mMRC 3) and Getting along (mMRC 4). Disability scores (total and for each of the six domains) increased as breathlessness became more severe. (Table 4 and Fig 2) People with breathlessness experienced disability for 10 days per month, including reducing or being unable to perform their usual activities or work for 3 and 4 days per month, respectively. (Table 4) Those with mMRC 4 experienced disability for 10 days per month, including reducing and completely ceasing their usual activities or work for 3 and 7 days per month, respectively.

Download:

Fig 2. Mean disability scores with 95% CIs for WHODAS-12 individual domains and level of breathlessness (modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] breathlessness scale) reported by 3,046 community-dwelling adults in an online survey for India [weighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.g002

Download:

Table 4. Weighted Mean (SD) and median (IQR) of the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 12-item (WHODAS-12) and its individual domains and breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) breathlessness scale for 3,046 respondents to an online survey in India [weighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.t004

Discussion

Key findings

This first-of-its-kind investigation found a high prevalence of breathlessness in community-dwelling adults in India, with 44% of the population experiencing any breathlessness (mMRC ≥1) and almost 4% experiencing most severe breathlessness (mMRC 4). At the population level in India, this translates to 626 million people living with breathlessness of some degree of intensity and 52 million people living with such debilitating breathlessness that they are housebound or have difficulty dressing or undressing because of it. Findings also indicate that breathlessness for the Indian population is associated with poorer quality of life and significant disability, including reduced ability to undertake activities of daily living.

The prevalence rates reported for any breathlessness in India in this study were higher than some of the limited data available for HICs. Australian population studies using similar methodology have reported prevalence rates of mMRC ≥1 of approximately 40% (n = 10,072) [13] and 42% (n = 10,033), [48] while a US study (n = 10,881) has reported breathlessness rates of 22% for mMRC ≥1 [49]. The exception is a UK online survey (n = 356,799) where 71% of adults reported breathlessness mMRC ≥1 [50].

Self-attributed causes for breathlessness in India included conditions commonly associated with breathlessness (e.g., respiratory or heart conditions) [19], but also factors not identified to date in other settings (e.g., malnourishment or anaemia). Of note, respiratory conditions (other than tuberculosis) were not indicated as a factor in those reporting most severe breathlessness. One in nine people (~12%) could not attribute a cause for their symptom (increasing to 17% for those with most severe breathlessness), potentially indicating a gap in health-seeking behaviour or how breathlessness is conceptualised, identified, assessed, diagnosed or managed in India. In addition to underlying aetiologies, high prevalence of risk factors associated with breathlessness (e.g., history of smoking, passive smoking, cooking with solid fuels, occupational exposure or poor air quality) may also be contributing factors for the rates of breathlessness experienced in the Indian communities. Consistent with previous studies [51, 52], a larger proportion of women in our study reported being breathless compared to men.

In line with current understanding of the impact of breathlessness, our findings also indicate that breathlessness has far-reaching consequences for individuals’ wellbeing. The findings for India, however, indicate that quality of life was markedly compromised, spanning physical (e.g., mobility) and psychological (e.g., anxiety) domains, with people with most severe breathlessness experiencing extreme adverse impairment. Daily activities were also negatively impacted by breathlessness resulting in disruption as people go about their daily life. The impact was amplified with high rates of reported disability that permeates all aspects of a person’s life. Of note, people with breathlessness of mMRC 3 seem to be reporting less impact than expected which might be due to their having adjusted their lifestyle in order to cope with it.

Overall, our findings are consistent with the notion that doing new things is often a formidable barrier for those living with breathlessness. Instead, people tend to focus on managing their usual or essential activities and tasks, forgoing social interaction and participation. This coping mechanism means their worlds may shrink to accommodate the most essential tasks while forgoing almost everything else. This is consistent with the construct of ‘social death’, a shrinking of societal participation, whereby people experience increasing social isolation as they cope with increasing breathlessness by forgoing social activities and decreasing social engagements [53]. Given the magnitude of the problem reported in this study, uncovering the true extent of the impact of this symptom in India would require a nuanced exploration of the societal and cultural norms and circumstances that may play a role in how the symptom is perceived in the community, as well as a fundamental shift in how the symptom is identified in routine clinical consultations.

Disability in this study was higher than previous reports for India, with a mean total score 20.4 (SD 10.9) compared to 17.4 (SD 17.2) reported for people 65 years or older [54] This is in the context of our study sample being relatively young (median age 38 years). Our findings also indicate poorer quality of life than previously reported. In a cross-sectional survey (n = 2,409) to generate an Indian EQ-5D-5L value set, using face-to-face interviews in five Indian states, more people reported ‘no problems’ and fewer reported any problem including ‘moderate to extreme problems’ compared to our study.

Strengths and limitations

Strengths of the study include the use of quotas which reflect the total population of India and the engagement with people living with breathlessness independently of health care contact, potentially reaching people who were unable or unwilling to access clinical services for their breathlessness. However, its online delivery limited responses to those with internet access, which contributed to a greater proportion of respondents with higher education status and potentially missing people with lower socioeconomic status who may be more likely to experience long-term breathlessness.

The study has several limitations. First, all measures were self-reported and could not be clinically verified, introducing potential bias in the results. Participants were not asked about the history of any treated pulmonary tuberculosis as a potential underlying cause of breathlessness. Nutrition was also self-assessed. It is important know what is the perceived dominant underlying cause attributed by each respondent. Such information can highlight discrepancies from clinically generated attributions in subsequent research. Second, the survey was conducted in English only, limiting the sample. With more than 31 languages spoken in India [55], each with at least one million first language speakers, future studies should investigate the prevalence and impacts of breathlessness in more diverse populations, and longitudinally. The respondents’ proficiency in English was self-determined, without qualification whether that was the respondents’ first or second/third language. Future studies should explore how questions about breathlessness are understood and interpreted, including those used in validated tools such as the mMRC [56, 57]. Third, the study sample was positively skewed for education, which may have been due to its online delivery. Subsequently, the data were weighted without the 23% of people in India who do not have formal education.

Implications for clinical research, practice and policy

Exploring the prevalence and impacts of breathlessness in the English-speaking population in India is an important proof-of-principle, providing preliminary information about the prevalence, severity and impacts of this symptom in the community. The study provides foundational data to compare and inform our understanding of this disabling symptom and to help inform the development of better recognition, assessment and management practices [20]. Future studies should broaden the investigation to include non-English speaking populations in India, multi-dimensional assessments of breathlessness and its underlying conditions, including health-seeking behaviour by people living with this symptom [21].

Given the multi-factorial impacts of breathlessness and the disability it causes, clinicians should actively seek to identify these issues in routine practice. Equally, future research should explore the broader financial implications of living with breathlessness long-term, including being a potential driver for poverty. The absence of a safety net when employment or ability to work is compromised might also mean that consequences of living with this symptom are greater in LMICs.

Conclusion

This study estimates conservatively that 626 million people live with breathlessness in India of whom 52 million people may live with severe breathlessness. Breathlessness is associated with poorer quality of life and marked disability, including reduced ability to perform activities of daily living. These effects need to be investigated in larger cross-sectional and longitudinal studies with diverse populations to further delineate the impact of breathlessness at the individual, societal and health system levels, and help inform the development and delivery of targeted, person-centred symptom management and care.

Supporting information

S1 Checklist. Inclusivity in global research form.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.s001

(DOCX)

S1 Table. Characteristics of respondents (n = 3,046) by level of breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research (mMRC) scale [unweighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.s002

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Quality of Life (EQ-5D-5L) by level of breathlessness (measured on the modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] breathlessness scale) for 3,046 respondents to an online survey in India [unweighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.s003

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Impact of breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC ≥1; n = 1,351) on respondents’ everyday activities reported in an online survey for India [unweighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.s004

(DOCX)

S4 Table. Mean (SD) and median (IQR) of the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 12-item (WHODAS-12) and its individual domains and breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) breathlessness scale for 3,046 respondents to an online survey in India [unweighted data].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.s005

(DOCX)

S5 Table. Population and sample characteristics used for creating sampling weights.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.s006

(DOCX)

S6 Table. India Breathlessness Survey and 2011 Census of India Populations and variables used to create a sample weight.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002655.s007

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the survey respondents for giving so generously of their time to complete the survey. We are grateful to the staff at Qualtrics for their expert support with the survey’s set up and management. We would also like to thank Ms Debbie Marriott for her expertise and assistance in preparing this manuscript for publication.

References

1. Sandberg J, Ekström M, Börjesson M, Bergstrom G, Rosengren A, Angeras O, et al. Underlying contributing conditions to breathlessness among middle-aged individuals in the general population: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2020;7(1):e000643. pmid:32978243
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
2. Sandberg J, Olsson M, Ekström M. Underlying conditions contributing to breathlessness in the population. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2021;15(4):219. pmid:34610625
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
3. Clark J, Chang S, Kinchin I, Ferreira D, Kochovska S, Morgan D, et al. Lower workforce participation is associated with more severe persisting breathlessness. BMC Pulm Med. 2022;22(1):93. pmid:35303861
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
4. Currow DC, Chang S, Dal Grande E, Ferreira DH, Kochovska S, Kinchin I, et al. Quality of life changes with duration of chronic breathlessness: a random sample of community-dwelling people. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;60(4);818–27. pmid:32442480
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
5. Currow DC, Chang S, Reddel HK, Kochovska S, Ferreira D, Ekstrom M. Breathlessness, anxiety, depression, and function–the BAD-F study: a cross-sectional and population prevalence study in adults. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;59(2):197–205. pmid:31654741
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
6. Kochovska S, Chang S, Morgan DD, Ferreira D, Sidhu M, Moussa RS, et al. Activities forgone because of chronic breathlessness: a cross-sectional population prevalence study. Palliat Med Rep. 2020;1(1):166–70. pmid:34223472
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
7. Kochovska S, Currow D, Chang S, Johnson MJ, Ferreira D, Morgan D, et al. Persisting breathlessness and activities reduced or ceased: a population study in older men. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2022;9(1):e001168. pmid:35606021
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
8. Ekström M, Johnson MJ, Taylor B, Luszcz M, Wohland P, Gerreira D, et al. Breathlessness and sexual activity in older adults: the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2018;28(1):1–6.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
9. Nicholls DA. The experience of chronic breathlessness. Physiother Theory Pract. 2003;19(3):123–36.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
10. Ferreira DH, Kochovska S, Honson A, Phillips JL, Currow DC. Two faces of the same coin: a qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ coexistence with chronic breathlessness associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). BMC Palliat Care. 2020;19:1–12.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
11. Dzingina MD, Reilly CC, Bausewein C, Jolley CJ, Moxham J, McCrone P, et al. Variations in the cost of formal and informal health care for patients with advanced chronic disease and refractory breathlessness: a cross-sectional secondary analysis. Palliat Med. 2017;31(4):369–77. pmid:28190370
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
12. Currow DC, Chang S, Ekström M, Hutchinson A, Luckett T, Kochovska S, et al. Health service utilisation associated with chronic breathlessness: random population sample. ERJ Open Res. 2021;7(4):00415–2021. pmid:34651042
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
13. Poulos LM, Ampon RD, Currow DC, Marks GB, Toelle BG, Reddel HK. Prevalence and burden of breathlessness in Australian adults: The National Breathlessness Survey—a cross‐sectional web‐based population survey. Respirology. 2021;26(8):768–75. pmid:33971059
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
14. Moens K, Higginson IJ, Harding R, EURO IMPACT. Are there differences in the prevalence of palliative care-related problems in people living with advanced cancer and eight non-cancer conditions? A systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2014;48(4):660–77. pmid:24801658
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
15. Currow DC, Smith J, Davidson PM, Newton PJ, Agar MR, Abernethy AP. Do the trajectories of dyspnea differ in prevalence and intensity by diagnosis at the end of life? A consecutive cohort study. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;39(4):680–90. pmid:20413056
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
16. Grønseth R, Vollmer WM, Hardie JA, Ólafsdóttir IS, Lamprecht B, Buist AS, et al. Predictors of dyspnoea prevalence: results from the BOLD study. Eur Respir J. 2014;43(6):1610–20. pmid:24176991
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
17. Allwood BW, Gillespie R, Bateman M, Olckers H, Taborda-Barata L, Calligaro GL, et al. Five-year follow-up of participants diagnosed with chronic airflow obstruction in a South African Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease (BOLD) survey. S Afr Med J. 2018;108(2):138–43. pmid:29429447
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
18. World Health Organisation. Noncommunicable diseases 2021 [Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases accessed 17 July 2023.
19. Johnson MJ, Bowden JA, Abernethy AP, Currow DC. To what causes do people attribute their chronic breathlessness? A population survey. J Palliat Med. 2012;15(7):744–50. pmid:22687264
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
20. Clark J, Kochovska S, Currow DC. Burden of respiratory problems in low-income and middle-income countries. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2022;16(4):210–15. pmid:36102933
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
21. Kane S, Joshi M, Desai S, Mahal A, McPake B. People’s care seeking journey for a chronic illness in rural India: Implications for policy and practice. Soc Sci Med. 2022;312:115390. pmid:36167024
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
22. Meghji J, Mortimer K, Agusti A, Allwood B, Asher I, Bateman ED, et al. Improving lung health in low-income and middle-income countries: from challenges to solutions. Lancet. 2021;397(10277):928–40. pmid:33631128
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
23. Ram B, Thakur R. Epidemiology and economic burden of continuing challenge of infectious diseases in India: analysis of socio-demographic differe.ntials. Front Public Health. 2022;10:901276.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
24. Mills A. Health care systems in low-and middle-income countries. New Eng J Med. 2014;370(6):552–57. pmid:24499213
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
25. Stolz D, Mkorombindo T, Schumann DM, Agusta A, Ash SY, Bafadhel M, et al. Towards the elimination of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2022;400(10356):921–72.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
26. Barnes-Harris MMM, Daniel S, Venkateswaran C, Hutchinson A, Johnson MJ. How physicians in South India recognize, assess, and manage people with chronic breathlessness syndrome: A thematic analysis. Indian J Palliat Care. 2021;27(1):54. pmid:34035618
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
27. Bestall J, Paul E, Garrod R, Garnham R, Jones PW, Wedzicha JA. Usefulness of the Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea scale as a measure of disability in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax. 1999;54(7):581–86. pmid:10377201
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
28. Verma A, Gudi N, Yadav UN, Roy MP, Mahmood A, Nagaraja R, et al. Prevalence of COPD among population above 30 years in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Glob Health. 2021;11:04038. pmid:34484706
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
29. Singh N, Agrawal S, Jiwnani S, Mohan A, Penumadu P, Prasad KT, et al. Lung cancer in India. J Thorac Oncol. 2021:16(8):1250–66. pmid:34304854
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
30. Abdul-Aziz AA, Desikan P, Prabhakaran D, Schroeder LF. Tackling the burden of cardiovascular diseases in India: The essential diagnostics list. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019;12(4):e005195.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
31. World Health Organisation. Global tuberculosis report 2022, 2022.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
32. Lavoie K, Gosselin-Boucher V, Stojanovic J, Gupta S, Gagne M, Joyal-Desmarais K, et al. Understanding national trends in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Canada: results from five sequential cross-sectional representative surveys spanning April 2020–March 2021. BMJ Open. 2022;12(4):e059411. pmid:35383087
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
33. Scott AW, Bressler NM, Ffolkes S, Wittenborn JS, Jorkasky J. Public attitudes about eye and vision health. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134(10):1111–18. pmid:27490785
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
34. Serresse L, Simon-Tillaux N, Decavèle M, Gay F, Nion N, Lavault S, et al. Lifting dyspnoea invisibility: COVID-19 face masks, the experience of breathing discomfort, and improved lung health perception–a French nationwide survey. Eur Respir J. 2022;59(3):2101459. pmid:34475232
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
35. ISO. ISO 9001 Quality Menagement Systems [Available from: https://www.iso.org/iso-9001-quality-management.html.
36. ISO. ISO 27001 Information Security Management Systems [Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/27001.
37. Qualtrics. ESOMAR 28: 28 Questions to Help Buyers of Online Samples, 2019.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
38. The World Bank. Urban population (% of total population)—India 2023 [Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS?locations=IN accessed 14 August 2023.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
39. Wikipedia. 2011 Census of India 2023 [Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Census_of_India#Information accessed 4 September 2023.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
40. The World Bank. Literacy rate, adult total (% of people ages 15 and above)—India 2022 [Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ADT.LITR.ZS?locations=IN accessed 4 September 2023.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
41. National Statistics Office. Key indicators of household social consumption on education in India. In: Implementation MoSaP, ed. New Delhi: Government of India, 2019.
42. Statista. India’s growing internet connectivity 2023 [Available from: https://www.statista.com/chart/30029/internet-penetration-rate-in-india/ accessed 4 September 2023.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
43. The World Bank. Individuals using the Internet (% of population)—India 2023 [Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.ZS?locations=IN accessed 14 August 2023.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
44. Johnson MJ, Yorke J, Hansen-Flaschen J, Lansing R, Ekstrom M, Similowski T, et al. Towards an expert consensus to delineate a clinical syndrome of chronic breathlessness. Eur Respir J. 2017;49(5):1602277. pmid:28546269
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
45. Garrod R, Bestall JC, Paul EA, Wedzicha JA, Jones PW. Development and validation of a standardized measure of activity of daily living in patients with severe COPD: the London Chest Activity of Daily Living scale (LCADL). Respir Med. 2000; 94(6):589–96. pmid:10921765
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
46. Üstün TB, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Rehm J, World Health Organisation. Measuring health and disability: Manual for WHO disability assessment schedule WHODAS 2.0: World Health Organization 2010.
47. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche P, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453–57. pmid:18064739
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
48. Kochovska S, Chang S, Ferreira D, Brunelli VN, Luckett T, Morgan L, et al. Invisibility of breathlessness in clinical consultations: a cross-sectional, national online survey. Eur Respir J. 2022;60(5):2201603. pmid:36202418
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
49. Santos M, Kitzman DW, Matsushita K, Loehr L, Sueta CA, Shah AM. Prognostic importance of dyspnea for cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in persons without prevalent cardiopulmonary disease: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. PLoS One. 2016;11(10):e0165111. pmid:27780208
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
50. Elbehairy AF, Quint JK, Rogers J, Laffan M, Polkey MI, Hopkinson NS. Patterns of breathlessness and associated consulting behaviour: results of an online survey. Thorax. 2019;74(8):814–17. pmid:30962273
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
51. Ekström M, Sundh J, Schiöler L, Lindberg E, Rosengren A, Bergstrom G, et al. Absolute lung size and the sex difference in breathlessness in the general population. PLoS One. 2018;13(1):e0190876. pmid:29304074
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
52. Craig R, Mindell J (eds). Health Survey for England Respiratory Health 2010. Leeds: NHS Information Centre. 2011
53. Currow DC, Johnson MJ. Distilling the essence of breathlessness: the first vital symptom: Eur Respir J. 2015;45:1526–28. pmid:26028616
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
54. Sosa AL, Albanese E, Stephan BCM, Dewey M, Acosta D, Ferri CP, et al. Prevalence, distribution, and impact of mild cognitive impairment in Latin America, China, and India: a 10/66 population-based study. PLoS Med. 2012;9(2):e1001170. pmid:22346736
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
55. Wikipedia. List of languages by number of native speakers in India [Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India2023.
56. Yorke J, Khan N, Garrow A, Tyson S, Singh D, Vestbo J, et al. Evaluation of the Individual Activity Descriptors of the mMRC Breathlessness Scale: A Mixed Method Study. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2022;17:2289–99. pmid:36133735
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
57. Sunjaya A, Poulos L, Reddel H, Jenkins C. Qualitative validation of the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale as a patient-reported measure of breathlessness severity. Respir Med 2022; 203: 106984. pmid:36179385
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar

[ref1] 1. Sandberg J, Ekström M, Börjesson M, Bergstrom G, Rosengren A, Angeras O, et al. Underlying contributing conditions to breathlessness among middle-aged individuals in the general population: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2020;7(1):e000643. pmid:32978243
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[2] View Article

[3] PubMed/NCBI

[4] Google Scholar

[ref2] 2. Sandberg J, Olsson M, Ekström M. Underlying conditions contributing to breathlessness in the population. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2021;15(4):219. pmid:34610625
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[6] View Article

[7] PubMed/NCBI

[8] Google Scholar

[ref3] 3. Clark J, Chang S, Kinchin I, Ferreira D, Kochovska S, Morgan D, et al. Lower workforce participation is associated with more severe persisting breathlessness. BMC Pulm Med. 2022;22(1):93. pmid:35303861
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[10] View Article

[11] PubMed/NCBI

[12] Google Scholar

[ref4] 4. Currow DC, Chang S, Dal Grande E, Ferreira DH, Kochovska S, Kinchin I, et al. Quality of life changes with duration of chronic breathlessness: a random sample of community-dwelling people. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;60(4);818–27. pmid:32442480
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[14] View Article

[15] PubMed/NCBI

[16] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Currow DC, Chang S, Reddel HK, Kochovska S, Ferreira D, Ekstrom M. Breathlessness, anxiety, depression, and function–the BAD-F study: a cross-sectional and population prevalence study in adults. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020;59(2):197–205. pmid:31654741
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[18] View Article

[19] PubMed/NCBI

[20] Google Scholar

[ref6] 6. Kochovska S, Chang S, Morgan DD, Ferreira D, Sidhu M, Moussa RS, et al. Activities forgone because of chronic breathlessness: a cross-sectional population prevalence study. Palliat Med Rep. 2020;1(1):166–70. pmid:34223472
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[22] View Article

[23] PubMed/NCBI

[24] Google Scholar

[ref7] 7. Kochovska S, Currow D, Chang S, Johnson MJ, Ferreira D, Morgan D, et al. Persisting breathlessness and activities reduced or ceased: a population study in older men. BMJ Open Respir Res. 2022;9(1):e001168. pmid:35606021
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[26] View Article

[27] PubMed/NCBI

[28] Google Scholar

[ref8] 8. Ekström M, Johnson MJ, Taylor B, Luszcz M, Wohland P, Gerreira D, et al. Breathlessness and sexual activity in older adults: the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2018;28(1):1–6.
View Article
Google Scholar

[30] View Article

[31] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Nicholls DA. The experience of chronic breathlessness. Physiother Theory Pract. 2003;19(3):123–36.
View Article
Google Scholar

[33] View Article

[34] Google Scholar

[ref10] 10. Ferreira DH, Kochovska S, Honson A, Phillips JL, Currow DC. Two faces of the same coin: a qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ coexistence with chronic breathlessness associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). BMC Palliat Care. 2020;19:1–12.
View Article
Google Scholar

[36] View Article

[37] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Dzingina MD, Reilly CC, Bausewein C, Jolley CJ, Moxham J, McCrone P, et al. Variations in the cost of formal and informal health care for patients with advanced chronic disease and refractory breathlessness: a cross-sectional secondary analysis. Palliat Med. 2017;31(4):369–77. pmid:28190370
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[39] View Article

[40] PubMed/NCBI

[41] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Currow DC, Chang S, Ekström M, Hutchinson A, Luckett T, Kochovska S, et al. Health service utilisation associated with chronic breathlessness: random population sample. ERJ Open Res. 2021;7(4):00415–2021. pmid:34651042
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[43] View Article

[44] PubMed/NCBI

[45] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Poulos LM, Ampon RD, Currow DC, Marks GB, Toelle BG, Reddel HK. Prevalence and burden of breathlessness in Australian adults: The National Breathlessness Survey—a cross‐sectional web‐based population survey. Respirology. 2021;26(8):768–75. pmid:33971059
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[47] View Article

[48] PubMed/NCBI

[49] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Moens K, Higginson IJ, Harding R, EURO IMPACT. Are there differences in the prevalence of palliative care-related problems in people living with advanced cancer and eight non-cancer conditions? A systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2014;48(4):660–77. pmid:24801658
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[51] View Article

[52] PubMed/NCBI

[53] Google Scholar

[ref15] 15. Currow DC, Smith J, Davidson PM, Newton PJ, Agar MR, Abernethy AP. Do the trajectories of dyspnea differ in prevalence and intensity by diagnosis at the end of life? A consecutive cohort study. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;39(4):680–90. pmid:20413056
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[55] View Article

[56] PubMed/NCBI

[57] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Grønseth R, Vollmer WM, Hardie JA, Ólafsdóttir IS, Lamprecht B, Buist AS, et al. Predictors of dyspnoea prevalence: results from the BOLD study. Eur Respir J. 2014;43(6):1610–20. pmid:24176991
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[59] View Article

[60] PubMed/NCBI

[61] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Allwood BW, Gillespie R, Bateman M, Olckers H, Taborda-Barata L, Calligaro GL, et al. Five-year follow-up of participants diagnosed with chronic airflow obstruction in a South African Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease (BOLD) survey. S Afr Med J. 2018;108(2):138–43. pmid:29429447
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[63] View Article

[64] PubMed/NCBI

[65] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. World Health Organisation. Noncommunicable diseases 2021 [Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases accessed 17 July 2023.

[ref19] 19. Johnson MJ, Bowden JA, Abernethy AP, Currow DC. To what causes do people attribute their chronic breathlessness? A population survey. J Palliat Med. 2012;15(7):744–50. pmid:22687264
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[68] View Article

[69] PubMed/NCBI

[70] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Clark J, Kochovska S, Currow DC. Burden of respiratory problems in low-income and middle-income countries. Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2022;16(4):210–15. pmid:36102933
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[72] View Article

[73] PubMed/NCBI

[74] Google Scholar

[ref21] 21. Kane S, Joshi M, Desai S, Mahal A, McPake B. People’s care seeking journey for a chronic illness in rural India: Implications for policy and practice. Soc Sci Med. 2022;312:115390. pmid:36167024
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[76] View Article

[77] PubMed/NCBI

[78] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Meghji J, Mortimer K, Agusti A, Allwood B, Asher I, Bateman ED, et al. Improving lung health in low-income and middle-income countries: from challenges to solutions. Lancet. 2021;397(10277):928–40. pmid:33631128
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[80] View Article

[81] PubMed/NCBI

[82] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Ram B, Thakur R. Epidemiology and economic burden of continuing challenge of infectious diseases in India: analysis of socio-demographic differe.ntials. Front Public Health. 2022;10:901276.
View Article
Google Scholar

[84] View Article

[85] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Mills A. Health care systems in low-and middle-income countries. New Eng J Med. 2014;370(6):552–57. pmid:24499213
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[87] View Article

[88] PubMed/NCBI

[89] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Stolz D, Mkorombindo T, Schumann DM, Agusta A, Ash SY, Bafadhel M, et al. Towards the elimination of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2022;400(10356):921–72.
View Article
Google Scholar

[91] View Article

[92] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Barnes-Harris MMM, Daniel S, Venkateswaran C, Hutchinson A, Johnson MJ. How physicians in South India recognize, assess, and manage people with chronic breathlessness syndrome: A thematic analysis. Indian J Palliat Care. 2021;27(1):54. pmid:34035618
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[94] View Article

[95] PubMed/NCBI

[96] Google Scholar

[ref27] 27. Bestall J, Paul E, Garrod R, Garnham R, Jones PW, Wedzicha JA. Usefulness of the Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea scale as a measure of disability in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax. 1999;54(7):581–86. pmid:10377201
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[98] View Article

[99] PubMed/NCBI

[100] Google Scholar

[ref28] 28. Verma A, Gudi N, Yadav UN, Roy MP, Mahmood A, Nagaraja R, et al. Prevalence of COPD among population above 30 years in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Glob Health. 2021;11:04038. pmid:34484706
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[102] View Article

[103] PubMed/NCBI

[104] Google Scholar

[ref29] 29. Singh N, Agrawal S, Jiwnani S, Mohan A, Penumadu P, Prasad KT, et al. Lung cancer in India. J Thorac Oncol. 2021:16(8):1250–66. pmid:34304854
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[106] View Article

[107] PubMed/NCBI

[108] Google Scholar

[ref30] 30. Abdul-Aziz AA, Desikan P, Prabhakaran D, Schroeder LF. Tackling the burden of cardiovascular diseases in India: The essential diagnostics list. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019;12(4):e005195.
View Article
Google Scholar

[110] View Article

[111] Google Scholar

[ref31] 31. World Health Organisation. Global tuberculosis report 2022, 2022.
View Article
Google Scholar

[113] View Article

[114] Google Scholar

[ref32] 32. Lavoie K, Gosselin-Boucher V, Stojanovic J, Gupta S, Gagne M, Joyal-Desmarais K, et al. Understanding national trends in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Canada: results from five sequential cross-sectional representative surveys spanning April 2020–March 2021. BMJ Open. 2022;12(4):e059411. pmid:35383087
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[116] View Article

[117] PubMed/NCBI

[118] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. Scott AW, Bressler NM, Ffolkes S, Wittenborn JS, Jorkasky J. Public attitudes about eye and vision health. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134(10):1111–18. pmid:27490785
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[120] View Article

[121] PubMed/NCBI

[122] Google Scholar

[ref34] 34. Serresse L, Simon-Tillaux N, Decavèle M, Gay F, Nion N, Lavault S, et al. Lifting dyspnoea invisibility: COVID-19 face masks, the experience of breathing discomfort, and improved lung health perception–a French nationwide survey. Eur Respir J. 2022;59(3):2101459. pmid:34475232
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[124] View Article

[125] PubMed/NCBI

[126] Google Scholar

[ref35] 35. ISO. ISO 9001 Quality Menagement Systems [Available from: https://www.iso.org/iso-9001-quality-management.html.

[ref36] 36. ISO. ISO 27001 Information Security Management Systems [Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/27001.

[ref37] 37. Qualtrics. ESOMAR 28: 28 Questions to Help Buyers of Online Samples, 2019.
View Article
Google Scholar

[130] View Article

[131] Google Scholar

[ref38] 38. The World Bank. Urban population (% of total population)—India 2023 [Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS?locations=IN accessed 14 August 2023.
View Article
Google Scholar

[133] View Article

[134] Google Scholar

[ref39] 39. Wikipedia. 2011 Census of India 2023 [Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Census_of_India#Information accessed 4 September 2023.
View Article
Google Scholar

[136] View Article

[137] Google Scholar

[ref40] 40. The World Bank. Literacy rate, adult total (% of people ages 15 and above)—India 2022 [Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ADT.LITR.ZS?locations=IN accessed 4 September 2023.
View Article
Google Scholar

[139] View Article

[140] Google Scholar

[ref41] 41. National Statistics Office. Key indicators of household social consumption on education in India. In: Implementation MoSaP, ed. New Delhi: Government of India, 2019.

[ref42] 42. Statista. India’s growing internet connectivity 2023 [Available from: https://www.statista.com/chart/30029/internet-penetration-rate-in-india/ accessed 4 September 2023.
View Article
Google Scholar

[143] View Article

[144] Google Scholar

[ref43] 43. The World Bank. Individuals using the Internet (% of population)—India 2023 [Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.ZS?locations=IN accessed 14 August 2023.
View Article
Google Scholar

[146] View Article

[147] Google Scholar

[ref44] 44. Johnson MJ, Yorke J, Hansen-Flaschen J, Lansing R, Ekstrom M, Similowski T, et al. Towards an expert consensus to delineate a clinical syndrome of chronic breathlessness. Eur Respir J. 2017;49(5):1602277. pmid:28546269
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[149] View Article

[150] PubMed/NCBI

[151] Google Scholar

[ref45] 45. Garrod R, Bestall JC, Paul EA, Wedzicha JA, Jones PW. Development and validation of a standardized measure of activity of daily living in patients with severe COPD: the London Chest Activity of Daily Living scale (LCADL). Respir Med. 2000; 94(6):589–96. pmid:10921765
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[153] View Article

[154] PubMed/NCBI

[155] Google Scholar

[ref46] 46. Üstün TB, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Rehm J, World Health Organisation. Measuring health and disability: Manual for WHO disability assessment schedule WHODAS 2.0: World Health Organization 2010.

[ref47] 47. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche P, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453–57. pmid:18064739
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[158] View Article

[159] PubMed/NCBI

[160] Google Scholar

[ref48] 48. Kochovska S, Chang S, Ferreira D, Brunelli VN, Luckett T, Morgan L, et al. Invisibility of breathlessness in clinical consultations: a cross-sectional, national online survey. Eur Respir J. 2022;60(5):2201603. pmid:36202418
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[162] View Article

[163] PubMed/NCBI

[164] Google Scholar

[ref49] 49. Santos M, Kitzman DW, Matsushita K, Loehr L, Sueta CA, Shah AM. Prognostic importance of dyspnea for cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in persons without prevalent cardiopulmonary disease: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. PLoS One. 2016;11(10):e0165111. pmid:27780208
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[166] View Article

[167] PubMed/NCBI

[168] Google Scholar

[ref50] 50. Elbehairy AF, Quint JK, Rogers J, Laffan M, Polkey MI, Hopkinson NS. Patterns of breathlessness and associated consulting behaviour: results of an online survey. Thorax. 2019;74(8):814–17. pmid:30962273
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[170] View Article

[171] PubMed/NCBI

[172] Google Scholar

[ref51] 51. Ekström M, Sundh J, Schiöler L, Lindberg E, Rosengren A, Bergstrom G, et al. Absolute lung size and the sex difference in breathlessness in the general population. PLoS One. 2018;13(1):e0190876. pmid:29304074
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[174] View Article

[175] PubMed/NCBI

[176] Google Scholar

[ref52] 52. Craig R, Mindell J (eds). Health Survey for England Respiratory Health 2010. Leeds: NHS Information Centre. 2011

[ref53] 53. Currow DC, Johnson MJ. Distilling the essence of breathlessness: the first vital symptom: Eur Respir J. 2015;45:1526–28. pmid:26028616
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[179] View Article

[180] PubMed/NCBI

[181] Google Scholar

[ref54] 54. Sosa AL, Albanese E, Stephan BCM, Dewey M, Acosta D, Ferri CP, et al. Prevalence, distribution, and impact of mild cognitive impairment in Latin America, China, and India: a 10/66 population-based study. PLoS Med. 2012;9(2):e1001170. pmid:22346736
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[183] View Article

[184] PubMed/NCBI

[185] Google Scholar

[ref55] 55. Wikipedia. List of languages by number of native speakers in India [Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers_in_India2023.

[ref56] 56. Yorke J, Khan N, Garrow A, Tyson S, Singh D, Vestbo J, et al. Evaluation of the Individual Activity Descriptors of the mMRC Breathlessness Scale: A Mixed Method Study. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2022;17:2289–99. pmid:36133735
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[188] View Article

[189] PubMed/NCBI

[190] Google Scholar

[ref57] 57. Sunjaya A, Poulos L, Reddel H, Jenkins C. Qualitative validation of the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale as a patient-reported measure of breathlessness severity. Respir Med 2022; 203: 106984. pmid:36179385
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[192] View Article

[193] PubMed/NCBI

[194] Google Scholar

Figures

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Design

Survey development and piloting

Setting

Participants

Measures

Assessment of breathlessness limiting exertion

Assessment of overall health and wellbeing

Statistical analysis

Results

Demographic characteristics

Breathlessness

Impacts of breathlessness.

Discussion

Key findings

Strengths and limitations

Implications for clinical research, practice and policy

Conclusion

Supporting information

S1 Checklist. Inclusivity in global research form.

S1 Table. Characteristics of respondents (n = 3,046) by level of breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research (mMRC) scale [unweighted data].

S2 Table. Quality of Life (EQ-5D-5L) by level of breathlessness (measured on the modified Medical Research Council [mMRC] breathlessness scale) for 3,046 respondents to an online survey in India [unweighted data].

S3 Table. Impact of breathlessness measured on the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC ≥1; n = 1,351) on respondents’ everyday activities reported in an online survey for India [unweighted data].

S5 Table. Population and sample characteristics used for creating sampling weights.

S6 Table. India Breathlessness Survey and 2011 Census of India Populations and variables used to create a sample weight.

Acknowledgments

References