ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2021
Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the lymphedema symptom intensity and distress survey.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric Properties of Quality of Life Questionnaires for Patients with Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to adapt the Lymphedema Symptom Intensity and Distress Survey- Arm (LSIDS-Arm) into Turkish and to test its validity and reliability. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween September 2017 and July 2018, this descriptive, methodological study included a total of 186 women (mean age: 55.4±10.2 years; range, 20 to 80 years) who were diagnosed with breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) and followed in the lymphedema outpatient clinic. Data were collected using sociodemographic and clinical features form, LSIDS-Arm, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Breast Cancer Scale+4 (FACT-B+4). After the linguistic and content validity of the scale was achieved, confirmatory factor analysis and known-groups validation were utilized to test the construct validity. Reliability of the survey was tested using the Cronbach alpha and Spearman Brown coefficient, item analysis, and parallel forms reliability.
resultsAll patients completed the questionnaire. After achievement of linguistic and content validity, confirmatory factor analysis results were found to be higher than the accepted value. Known-groups validation revealed a significant difference in the mean scores for the intensity and distress scales between the patients with and without lymphedema. Cronbach alpha for the subscales ranged from 0.61 to 0.86. Parallel forms reliability showed a moderate, significant correlation between subscales of the intensity and distress scales of the survey and the subscales of FACT-B+4.
conclusionThe Turkish version of the survey is valid and reliable and can be used to evaluate symptoms, severity of symptoms, and distress caused by BCRL symptoms in the Turkish women.
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.