ArticlePeerJ2020
Psychometric evaluation of a newly developed Elderly-Constipation Impact Scale.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of the Asian constipation assessment initiative questionnaire: a cross-sectional study on symptom reporting and constipation awareness.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Translation and Validation Testing of the Constipation-Related Quality of Life Scale for Use in Japan.Cureus · 2023Article
- Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Elderly-Constipation Impact Scale: a translation and validation study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- A Systematic Review of the Development and Psychometric Properties of Constipation-Related Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Opportunities for Digital Health.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Review
- Validity and Reliability of the Malay Versions of Bloating Severity (BSQ-M) and Quality of Life (BLQoL-M) Questionnaires.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic constipation is a common symptom among the elderly, and it may affect their quality of life (QoL). A lack of available research focused on the elderly means that this effect is not well understood. This study aimed to develop and validate a new scale (Elderly-Constipation Impact Scale (E-CIS)) to measure the impact of chronic constipation on QoL among the elderly.
methodsA pool of items was generated from a qualitative study, literature reviews, and expert reviews. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the original 40 items of the E-CIS and followed by 27 items for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A total of 470 elderly people with chronic constipation were involved.
resultsThe mean age of the participants was 68.64 ± 6.57. Finally, only 22 items were indicated as appropriately representing the E-CIS, which were grouped into seven subscales: 'daily activities', 'treatment satisfaction', 'lack of control of bodily function', 'diet restriction', 'symptom intensity', 'anxiety' and 'preventive actions'. The scale was confirmed as valid (root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.04, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.961, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.952 and chi-square/degree of freedom (chiSq/df) = 1.44) and reliable (Cronbach's alpha: 0.66-0.85, composite reliability (CR) = 0.699-0.851) to assess the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL.
conclusionsThe E-CIS is useful to measure the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL. A further test is needed to determine the validity and reliability of this scale in other elderly population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.