ArticleScientific reports2023
Psychometric evaluation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (APFQ-IR) in Iranian reproductive age women.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pelvic floor disorders (PFDs), as a silent alert, is one of the pervasive debilitating health concerns among women all over the world, such that in developed countries, one in four women, suffers from PFDs. Validity and reliability of the Australian Pelvic Floor Questionnaire (APFQ) has not been determined in Iran, so to determine APFQ's psychometric characteristics, we decided to conduct this study on women of reproductive age in Tabriz city, Iran. This methodological cross-sectional study was intended to determine the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the APFQ-IR in 5 steps including "translation process, content validity, face validity, construct validity (exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and examination of ceiling and floor effects) and reliability" on 400 reproductive age women referring to health centers in Tabriz city, Iran, with cluster random sampling method in the period between May 2022 to September 2022. The translation process was done based on two approaches, Dual panel, and Beaton et al.'s five steps. Then, in order to evaluate content validity, face validity, and construct validity, 10 instrument and PFDs experts, 10 women from the target group investigated the instrument's items, and 400 eligible women completed the instrument. Finally, to determine the reliability, two internal consistency methods, (Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega) and test-retest method (ICC) were used. In the present study, content validity assessment of APFQ-IR, showed a good level of validity (CVR = 0.96, CVI = 0.94). To assess construct validity, exploratory factor analysis results on 36 items, led to the identification of 4 factors including bladder function, bowel function, prolapse symptom and sexual function, which explained 45.53% of the cumulative variance and indicated the sufficiency of the sample size (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin = 0.750). Implementing confirmatory factor analysis, (RMSEA = 0.08, SRMR = 0.08, TLI = 0.90, CFI = 0.93, χ
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.