Trial reportFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery2021
Validation of a Spanish Version of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire.
Trial report in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery, 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.
- An online workshop to raise awareness of pelvic floor in track and field female athletes: a quasi-experimental study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Effects of an innovative educational program on female athletes' knowledge and habits related to pelvic floor care: a quasi-experimental study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Validation of the Arabic Linguistic Version of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Validation of the Hungarian version of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire (PIKQ).European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2024Article
- Symptomatology and knowledge regarding pelvic floor dysfunctions and influence of gender stereotypes in female athletes.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Pelvic floor disorder assessment of knowledge and symptoms: an educational intervention for Spanish-speaking women (PAKS study).International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to validate a Spanish version of the Prolapse and Incontinence Knowledge Questionnaire (PIKQ).
methodsValidation and reliability testing of the Spanish version of the PIKQ was conducted in 2 phases. In the first phase, a translation-back-translation method by 6 bilingual researchers was utilized to generate a final Spanish translation. In the second phase, bilingual women were randomized to complete the Spanish or English version first, followed by the alternate language. Agreement between individual items from English and Spanish versions was assessed by percent agreement and κ statistics. Intraclass correlation coefficients compared overall PIKQ scores and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and urinary incontinence (UI) subscores. To establish test-retest reliability, we calculated Pearson correlation coefficients. In order to have a precision of 10% for 90% agreement, so that the lower 95% confidence interval would not be less than 80% agreement, 50 bilingual participants were required.
resultsFifty-seven bilingual women were randomized and completed both versions of the PIKQ. Individual items showed 74%-97% agreement, good to excellent agreement (κ = 0.6-0.89) for 9 items and moderate agreement (κ = 0.4-0.59) for 14 items between English and Spanish PIKQ versions. Intraclass correlation coefficients of the overall score and POP and UI subscores showed excellent agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.81-0.91). Pearson correlation coefficients between initial and repeat Spanish scores were high: overall (r = 0.87) and for POP (r = 0.81) and UI subscores (r = 0.77).
conclusionsA valid and reliable Spanish version of the PIKQ has been developed to assess patient knowledge about UI and POP.
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.