ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2024
Development of self-administered questionnaire on barriers, prescription practices, and guideline adherence of osteoporosis management among tertiary care clinicians: content validity and reliability analysis.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome measurement tool for abortion care in Ethiopia: a mixed-method study.Reproductive health · 2026Article
- Clinical-radiomics nomogram construction from magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose osteoporosis: a preliminary study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Article
- Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) management using a nutrition recommender mobile application: identifying key requirements.BMC women's health · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study outlined the development of the barriers, prescribing practices, and guideline adherence for osteoporosis management according to the Clinicians' Osteoporosis Questionnaire (COQ) followed by an assessment of the content validity index and reliability test. Methods: The development of the COQ was performed in two stages. Stage I involved the development of the COQ, and stage II involved judgmental evidence and quantification of the questionnaire. Five panel experts related to the study area and five clinicians participated in the validity of the COQ assessment. Fifty clinicians took part in the reliability test evaluation by filling out the questionnaire twice at 2-week intervals. The content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR) were analyzed using Microsoft Excel, while Cohen's kappa statistic was used to determine the test-retest reliability using SPSS version 29. Results: Forty items and three domains, namely, barriers, prescribing practices, and guideline adherence for osteoporosis management, were identified in the COQ (version 4.0). The scale-level CVI (S-CVI/Ave) for every domain was above 0.9, which is considered acceptable. The CVRs for all the items were above 0.7, except for two items in the barrier domain and two items in the guideline adherence domain. Two items were revised to improve the clarity of the item, and other items were retained based on consensus among the expert panel. Between the test and retest, the reliability of individual items ranged from moderate to almost perfect for the barrier domain (k = 0.42-0.86), prescribing practice domain (k = 0.79-0.87), and guideline adherence domain (k = 0.46-1). None of the items had "fair" or "poor" agreement. Thus, the 40-item COQ (version 4.0) was finalized following the content and face validity analysis. Conclusions: Through an iterative process, the development and assessment of the COQ showed a high degree of content validity and reliability in measuring the barriers, prescribing practices, and guideline adherence among clinicians managing osteoporosis. Future studies should aim to further validate this instrument across different populations and settings, as well as explore methods to enhance its reliability and validity.
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.