ArticleOTO open
Translation and Validation of the Sinus and Nasal Quality of Life Surgery Survey in Serbian.
Article in OTO open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to translate the Sinus and Nasal Quality of Life Surgery Survey into the Serbian language to evaluate the test-retest reliability and validity. Study Design: The study included 49 consecutive patients between 12 and 18 years old with rhinologic symptoms. Patients were given a paper survey to complete along with a link to complete the online survey within the same day. Setting: The study was conducted at the University Children's Hospital Clinic for Pulmonology and Allergology between January 2023 and March 2023. Methods: Responses between the paper and online survey were compared and regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship. Internal reliability and test-retest reliability were assessed using Cronbach's Results: Pearson correlation coefficient between the paper and online survey was very high and statistically significant ( Conclusion: The survey is a useful questionnaire to evaluate the quality of life in patients with rhinologic symptoms. The high correlation between the paper and online survey shows the reliability of the questionnaire regardless of administration modality.
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.