ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2019
Strong agreement between interview-obtained and self-administered Wexner and St. Mark's scores using a single questionnaire.
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 9 papers, 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical effectiveness and safety of self-expandable implantable bulking agents for faecal incontinence: a systematic review.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Pooled it
- Impact of episiotomy on anal incontinence following second- to fourth-degree perineal tears-A cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Strong agreement between self-administered and interview-obtained bowel function score in patients with Hirschsprung disease and anorectal malformation.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Article
- Article
- Effect of illness perceptions on asthma control and quality of life amongst adult outpatients with asthma in China.BMC psychology · 2023Article
- Comparison of the agreement between WeChat-based self-administered and interviewer-administered data on infant and young child feeding in China: A test-retest study.Journal of global health · 2022Article
- Anal incontinence after a prolonged second stage of labor in primiparous women.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Anorectal dysfunction in multiple sclerosis patients: A pilot study on the effect of an individualized rehabilitation approach.NeuroRehabilitation · 2022Article
- Percutaneous electrical stimulation of the posterior tibial nerve for the treatment of fecal incontinence: manometric results after 6 months of treatment.International journal of colorectal disease · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisSt Mark's incontinence score (SMIS) and the Wexner score have been constructed and validated as interview-based scoring systems. We developed a single questionnaire from which a separate SMIS or Wexner score could be derived. This study aimed to demonstrate the level of agreement between self-administered (sSMIS and sWexner) and interview-based (iSMIS and iWexner) scores using this questionnaire.
methodsOne hundred five consecutive patients (30 male) seen in the incontinence outpatient clinics at the Østfold Hospital Trust, Sarpsborg, and University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, completed the self-administered incontinence questionnaire prior to the appointment. Following clinical investigation, the patients were interviewed about their symptoms according to the SMIS and Wexner scores, with the interviewers blinded to the results from self-reported questionnaire. Agreement between total scores and between subscores of the various items were determined using interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa statistics, respectively.
resultsThe self-administered questionnaire was incomplete in six cases (5.7%) and the interview-based was incomplete in two cases. Agreement was almost perfect between the iSMIS and sSMIS and between the iWexner score and sWexner score (ICC 0.90 and 0.92, respectively). Agreement was substantial to almost perfect for all items in both scoring systems, with kappa values ranging from 0.64-0.94. Mean iSMIS was 9.48 versus 9.53 for sSMIS (p = 0.90) and 8.26 versus 8.44 for the iWexner and sWexner score, respectively (p = 0.42).
conclusionThe SMIS and Wexner scores can be completed by the patients using a single questionnaire, and the derived SMIS and Wexner scores are highly consistent with scores obtained by interview.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31172220What 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.