Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26883366›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2016

German translation and validation of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-IUGA revised (PISQ-IR).

Gerda Trutnovsky, Eva Nagele, Daniela Ulrich, Thomas Aigmüller, Daniela Dörfler, Ingrid Geiss, Evi Reinstadler, Johannes Angleitner-Flotzinger, Jean-Jacques Ries, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Gerda TrutnovskyDepartment of Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 14, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Eva NageleDepartment of Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 14, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Daniela UlrichDepartment of Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 14, 8036, Graz, Austria. daniela.ulrich@medunigraz.at.
Thomas AigmüllerDepartment of Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 14, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Daniela DörflerDepartment of Gynecology, Vienna General Hospital, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria.
Ingrid GeissDepartment of Gynecology, Hospital Lilienfeld, Im Tal 2, 3180, Lilienfeld, Austria.
Evi ReinstadlerDepartment of Gynecology, Hospital Dornbirn, Lustenauerstraße 4, 6850, Dornbirn, Austria.
Johannes Angleitner-FlotzingerDepartment of Gynecology, St.Vincents Hospital Ried, Schlossberg 1, 4910, Ried im Innkreis, Austria.
Jean-Jacques RiesDepartment of Gynecology, Hospital Aarau, Tellstrasse, 5001, Aarau, Switzerland.
Vesna Bjelic-RadisicDepartment of Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 14, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Austrian Urogynecology Working Group
Medical University of Graz · ATKrankenhaus Oberndorf · ATFACC (Austria) · ATVienna General Hospital · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisCondition-specific sexual questionnaires are essential for clinical trials and important patient-reported outcome measures. The aim of the study was to translate the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-International Urogynecology Association Revised (PISQ-IR) into German and to clinically validate it in a German-speaking population.

methodsThe translated PISQ-IR was linguistically validated in two rounds of cognitive interviews. The final instrument was psychometrically validated in women presenting to urogynecological clinics with pelvic floor dysfunction. For analysis of criterion validity, three related self-reported measures were administered: the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), the Kings Health Questionnaire (KHQ), and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). For external validity, PISQ-IR subscales were compared to the clinical-measures Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POP-Q) stage, pelvic floor muscle tone, and Oxford Grading Scale. Descriptive statistics, floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha coefficient, and Pearson correlations were calculated for all PISQ-IR subscales.

resultsThe PISQ-IR was completed by 197 women, out of whom 66 (33.5 %) considered themselves not sexually active (NSA) and 131 (66.5 %) as sexually active (SA). Participants' mean age was 57 ± 12 years; 50 % were diagnosed with symptomatic POP, 74 % with urinary incontinence (UI) and 4 % with anal incontinence (AI). The PISQ-IR subscales were analyzed separately for SA and NSA women with Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranging from 0.64 to 0.94. Moderate to high correlations were observed between PISQ-IR subscales and related quality of life (QoL) scales and corresponding FSFI scales.

conclusionInitial testing of the German PISQ-IR suggests it is an internally consistent and valid tool for use in clinical practice and research.

Indexed as

TranslationsAgedFecal IncontinenceFemaleGermanyHumansMiddle AgedPelvic Organ ProlapsePsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsSexual BehaviorSexual Dysfunction, PhysiologicalSurveys and QuestionnairesUrinary IncontinencePelvic floor disorderPISQ-IRQuestionnaireSexual functionValidation

Identifiers

PMID26883366
PMCPMC4947097
OpenAlexW2281651499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.