ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021
Validation of the Sinhala translations of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire in a Sri Lankan population.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) short form in Urdu: a comprehensive linguistic and psychometric analysis.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Observational
- Development and Validation of the Nursing Information Security Questionnaire.Applied clinical informatics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThis study was to translate and validate self-reported questionnaires, the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) into Sinhala, the language spoken by the majority of Sri Lankans.
methodsA total of 270 patients were enrolled in this study. Two groups were selected with pelvic organ prolapse (POP)-cases and without POP-controls in a ratio of 1:2 respectively. Psychometric properties of the questionnaires were assessed using content validity, face validity, convergent validity, construct validity, internal consistency, and reliability. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) was used as the test to quantify POP.
resultsExcellent content validity was demonstrated by a content validity ratio for all items by experts. Face validity was confirmed by non-experts using a five-point Likert scale and Mann-Whitney U test for all items. Internal consistency was found to be high for both questionnaires (Cronbach's alpha >0.8) in all items. Construct validity was assessed by receiver-operating characteristic curves and the area under the curve is above 0.5 in all items in both questionnaires. Convergent validity was assessed using Pearson coefficient correlation, which was above 0.8 for all subscales. Reliability was low for all subscales in the paired t test.
conclusionsThe Sinhala versions of PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 were valid, consistent, responsive, but have low reliability in the Sri Lankan setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33779797What 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.