ArticleBMC women's health2021
Arabic translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire in a Saudi population.
Article in BMC women's health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Arabic Version of the Prolapse Quality of Life Questionnaire in the United Arab Emirates.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Psychometric evaluation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (APFQ-IR) in Iranian reproductive age women.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Evaluation and acceptability of patient-reported outcome measures in women following pelvic organ prolapse procedures.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Validation and translation of the Hungarian version of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (APFQ-H).International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Spanish cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire in running women.Scientific reports · 2022Observational
- Prevalence of pelvic floor dysfunction in women in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study.Women's health (London, England)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe aims of the study were the translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of self-administered Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (APFQ) on a Saudi population.
methodsThe translation and cultural adaptation was performed in 854 women over 18 and not pregnant who agreed to answer the Arabic version of the questionnaire. The content/face validity, internal consistency (reliability), and construct validity (factor analysis) were assessed. Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS 24.0 statistical software.
resultsThe Cronbach's alpha results were above 0.8 for the questionnaire's overall reliability (bladder function: 0.877, bowel function: 0.834, prolapse symptoms: 0.784, sexual function: 0.762) showing adequate internal consistency reliability and high statistical significance. A statistically significant correlation was observed among the 40 items of the questionnaire. The issue of multicollinearity was not found, and the determinant of the correlation matrix was 0.001. A value of > 0.5 was achieved when the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin and Bartlett's tests measured 0.806 and the Bartlett's test of sphericity was statistically significant χ
conclusionsThis study provides the Arabic version of the self-administered APFQ as a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating symptom severity and impact of pelvic floor dysfunction on the quality of life of Arabic women. It also will enable the researchers from Arab countries to use this instrument to assess pelvic floor dysfunction prevalence in their 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.