ArticleRheumatology international2016
The reliability and validity of the simplified Chinese version of Male QUALEFFO-26.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Health-related quality of life in men with osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Endocrine · 2021Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate the reliability and validity of Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-26) in male osteoporosis patients from Chinese population. The simplified Chinese version of Male QUALEFFO-26 was translated and adapted on the basis of QUALEFFO-31, which was assigned to the cases and controls together with SF-36. Reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's α. Validity was assessed with Pearson's correlation analysis between the similar domains of the two questionnaires. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was carried out to determine the ability of male QUALEFFO-26 to discriminate between cases and controls. The ICC was 0.83 for pain domain, 0.79 for mental domain and 0.81 for physical function. Cronbach's α of each domain ranged from 0.82 to 0.89. Pearson correlation coefficients indicated significantly high correlations between corresponding domains of QUALEFFO-26 and SF-36, with r ranging from -0.523 to -0.832. ROC analysis showed that all the domains of QUALEFFO-26 were significantly predictive of vertebral deformity, with the values of AUC ranging from 0.68 to 0.84. The simplified Chinese version of Male QUALEFFO-26 was a valid, reliable and repeatable instrument showing favorable psychometric characteristics. The questionnaire can be used in male osteoporosis patients from Chinese population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26693934What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.