ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2023
Validity and reliability study of the quality of recovery scale in Turkish.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 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.
- Measuring Quality of Life in the Speakers with Dysarthria: Reliability and Validity of the Persian Version of the Qol-Dys.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: The aim of this study was to adapt the "Quality of Recovery-15 Scale", developed to measure the postoperative recovery quality of individuals, into Turkish by carrying out validity and reliability studies. Materials and methods: This methodological study was conducted with a total of 150 patients who underwent surgery under general anesthesia between November 2021 and January 2022 in a training and research hospital in the Black Sea region. Data was collected from the patients through the face-to-face interview method before the operation, on the 24th and the 48th hour postoperatively. First, the linguistic validity of the scale and then the validity and reliability analyses were carried out. Construct validity, confirmatory factor, and reliability analyses were then performed. Results: The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.851. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test for goodness of fit of the one-dimensional 14-item scale was 0.853 and Bartlett's test was significant. The goodness of fit values of the scale were found to be RMSEA = 0.149, CFI = 0.769, and GFI = 0.745, and they were considered acceptable levels. The eighth item was removed from the scale, which had originally consisted of 15 items, because the item correlation coefficient of this item was <0.200. Conclusion: The "Quality of Recovery Scale" was found to be a reliable and valid scale that can be used to measure the quality of recovery after surgery in Turkish society.
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.