ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2021
Reliability and validity of the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index questionnaire in the Turkish Population
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of cross-cultural adaptation of the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2021Pooled it
- The characteristics of brain function alterations in patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome across varying symptom severities evaluated by NIH-CPSI.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
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
Background/aim: To develop the first Turkish version of the National Institutes of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH- CPSI) questionnaire and to investigate its validity and reliability in men with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/ CPPS) and healthy controls. Material and methods: A total of 204 patients, 116 CP/CPPS and a control group which consisted of 88 healthy individuals were included in this prospective study. The NIH-CPSI form was first translated into Turkish and later on back into English. Using the Turkish version of the NIH CPSI, 40 patients completed the same questionnaires twice at 2-week intervals for test-retest concordance. To evaluate internal consistency and test-retest reliability, Cronbach’s alpha value, and the Spearman correlation test were utilized respectively. Results: Our findings demonstrated statistically significant differences in NIH-CPSI scores between the patients and control groups (P <0.001). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value of NIH-CPSI was 0.864. Reliability of test-retest was 0.909 (P <0.001). Additionally, the Spearman correlation test showed that the results obtained using the Turkish NIH-CPSI were significantly correlated. Conclusion: The first Turkish version of the NIH-CPSI was found to be a reliable and valid instrument for Turkish patients with chronic prostatitis in both clinical and research settings.
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.