Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31049644›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2019

Turkish translation of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire: validity and reliability.

Seyda Toprak Celenay, Ozge Coban, Cansu Sahbaz Pirincci, Zehra Korkut, Tugba Birben, Afra Alkan, Ayse Filiz Avsar

Abstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Validation of the Hungarian version of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire (PIKQ).European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2024
    Article
  4. Awareness of urinary incontinence in pregnant women as a neglected issue: a cross-sectional study.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2024
    Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Seyda Toprak CelenayFaculty of Health Science, Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkey. sydtoprak@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6720-4452
Ozge CobanFaculty of Health Science, Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkey.
Cansu Sahbaz PirincciClinic of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Zehra KorkutVocational School of Health Services, Department of Therapy and Rehabilitation, KTO Karatay University, Konya, Turkey.
Tugba BirbenGuneysu Vocational School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Rize, Turkey.
Afra AlkanFaculty of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkey.
Ayse Filiz AvsarFaculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisTo translate the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire (PIKQ) into Turkish and test its validity and reliability.

methodsThe study included 341 women. The translation of the PIKQ, which comprised of the urinary incontinence (PIKQ-UI) and pelvic organ prolapse (PIKQ-POP) sections, was performed in accordance with international recommendations. The Incontinence Quiz (IQ) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were applied to assess the level of knowledge about POP and UI. Psychometric analyses consisted of assessing the following: (1) construct validity by confirmatory factor analysis, (2) criterion and known group validity, (3) internal consistency reliability by the KR-20 coefficient, and (4) test-retest reliability over 1 week with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

resultsAll fit indices except the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual indicated acceptable fit for the final models. Criterion validity was supported by moderate correlations between the PIKQ-UI and the IQ (rho = 0.679, p < 0.001). There were positive and weak linear correlations between the PIKQ-UI and PIKQ-POP scores and their corresponding perceived knowledge scores (rho = 0.351, p = 0.013 and rho = 0.345, p = 0.014, respectively). The known group validity did not show differences indicating that participants did not have enough knowledge about UI and/or POP even when they had the condition or acquaintance with them (p = 0.852 and p = 0.185, respectively). Reliability was excellent as indicated by the ICCs of 0.91-0.90, and KR-20 of 0.67-0.75 indicated good internal consistency for the PIKQ-UI and PIKQ-POP, respectively.

conclusionsThe Turkish version of the PIKQ is a valid and reliable instrument to assess the knowledge of UI and POP.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPelvic Organ ProlapsePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesTranslationsTurkeyUrinary IncontinenceYoung AdultPelvic floor dysfunctionProlapse and incontinence knowledge questionnaireReliabilityValidity

Identifiers

PMID31049644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.