Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38872842›Full record

ArticleOpen research Europe2023

Measuring the psychological burden of women with pelvic floor complaints: The psychometric characteristics of a new instrument.

Alma Brand, Wim Waterink, Scott Rosas, Jacques van Lankveld

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open research Europe, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alma BrandFaculty of Psychology, Open Universiteit, Heerlen, Limburg, 6419 AT, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2084-2120
Wim WaterinkFaculty of Psychology, Open Universiteit, Heerlen, Limburg, 6419 AT, The Netherlands.
Scott RosasConcept Systems Inc., Ithaca, New York, NY 14850, USA.
Jacques van LankveldFaculty of Psychology, Open Universiteit, Heerlen, Limburg, 6419 AT, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0956-4067

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: To be able to optimize pelvic healthcare, it would be helpful to specifically assess women's psychological burden with pelvic floor complaints. In the absence of such an instrument, a new instrument was developed to measure this burden in women who seek help. In previous research, a comprehensive overview was yielded of women's restrictions and distress with pelvic floor complaints, and a conceptual model was developed of seven types of distress that were reflected by 33 statements. The present study was performed to investigate the psychometric properties of the new instrument, termed the Pelvic Floor Complaint-related Psychological Burden Inventory (PFC-PBI). Methods: In an online survey data was collected from women with and without pelvic floor complaints on the 33 statements. The internal consistency of the types of distress was tested using item-total correlation analysis, Principal Component and Confirmatory Factor Analyses were performed, and the convergent and divergent validity of the types of distress was examined against existing questionnaires using the Multi-Trait Multi-Method methodology. Results: Based on the factor analyses, a 10-item instrument was tested. Outcomes show excellent internal consistency of this instrument, comprising a single component. The PFC-PBI demonstrated satisfactory convergent and divergent validity. Conclusions: This new measure appears to be a promising tool to inventory the psychological burden of women suffering from pelvic floor complaints. Research into its further development, implementation, and clinical use appears warranted.

Indexed as

InventoryPelvic floor complaintsPsychological burdenPsychometric analysesReliable measureScale developmentScale validationValid Instrument

Identifiers

PMID38872842
PMCPMC11170070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.