ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2021
Psychometric properties of the German-language questionnaire for urinary incontinence diagnosis (QUID) in women with urinary incontinence.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the questionnaire for urinary incontinence diagnosis in women with urinary incontinence.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Application of estrogen for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in mice.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to translate the questionnaire for urinary incontinence diagnosis (QUID) into German and to assess its psychometric properties in German-speaking women with urinary incontinence (UI). The QUID contains two subscales to measure symptom severity of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and urge urinary incontinence (UUI) and to distinguish between both forms.
methodsA total of 161 women with UI completed the QUID and the King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ), each in the German version. To examine construct validity Spearman's correlation coefficients between both questionnaires were computed. Furthermore, the internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of the QUID and its criterion validity were examined. Looking at criterion validity, sensitivity, specificity, ROC curves, and Youden-indexes were computed for both subscales.
resultsThe QUID showed good construct validity by strong correlations with related domains of the KHQ. Cronbach's alpha values were good for both subscales of the QUID (SUI-subscale: 0.76; UUI-subscale: 0.86). Sensitivity and specificity were 83% (95% CI, 0.72-0.9) and 45% (95% CI, 0.25-0.67) for the SUI-subscale and 83% (95% CI, 0.7-0.91) and 56% (95% CI, 0.4-0.72) for the UUI-subscale. Youden-index was 0.28 for the SUI-subscale and 0.39 for the UUI-subscale at the given cut-off values.
conclusionPsychometric properties of the German-language QUID are principally good and support its use in the German-speaking area. However, the modest specificity when distinguishing between SUI and UUI should be taken into account. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00018777 (date of registration: 16-January-2020).
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.