ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2022
Three-year follow-up of a self-administered Australian pelvic floor questionnaire validated in Chinese pregnant and postpartum women.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Evaluation and acceptability of patient-reported outcome measures in women following pelvic organ prolapse procedures.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Spanish cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire in running women.Scientific reports · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe aim of this study was to verify whether the Chinese version of the self-administered Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (APFQ) can assess the changes in symptoms over a long time period (responsiveness) and to verify the reliability and validity of the questionnaire after 3 years of follow-up.
methodsThe questionnaire was completed by 146 women using the WeChat platform after 3 years of follow-up. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha). Construct validity was evaluated by significantly distinguished differences in symptom scores between women who did and did not subjectively suffer bothersome symptoms. Responsiveness was evaluated in 146 women. The effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM) were used to assess the degree of responsiveness.
resultsOf the 146 women, all completed the questionnaire through the WeChat platform without missing any items. Reliability, Cronbach's alpha for the four domains and total APFQ were: bladder function 0.78, bowel function 0.71, pelvic organ prolapse 0.78, sexual function 0.68 and total APFQ 0.84. Concerning construct validity, the APFQ significantly distinguished the symptom scores between women who did and did not subjectively suffer from bothersome symptoms, and the score difference was 1.1-1.6 points, 1.2 points, 2.0-3.7 points and 1.4 points, respectively. For responsiveness, three domains showed slight (bowel domain) to moderate (bladder domain, sex domain) sensitivity to change. ES and SRM ranged from 0.21 to 0.75 and 0.16 to 0.60, respectively.
conclusionsThe Chinese version of the self-administered APFQ is reliable and valid and can monitor the changes in symptoms over time.
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.