ArticleInternational wound journal2025
Validity, reliability and dimensionality of the Norwegian version of Wound-QoL.
Article in International wound journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Data to Clinical Decisions in Chronic Wound Care: Evaluation of the Interpretability, Minimal Important Difference, and Smallest Detectable Change of the Wound-QoL-14 in a Spanish Population.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Validation of the Swedish Wound-QOL-14: A Shortened Version of the Original 17-Item Wound-Specific Quality of Life Instrument.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Validation of the Spanish Version of the Wound-QoL-14 Wound-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Cardiff Wound Impact Schedule-Validity, Reliability and Dimensionality of the Norwegian Version.International wound journal · 2025Article
- Validity, reliability and dimensionality of the Norwegian version of Wound-QoL.International wound journal · 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
Abstract
The aim of the study was to explore the psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the Wound-quality of life (QoL)-17. We included 204 patients with hard-to-heal wounds on the lower extremity. Patients filled out the Wound-QoL-17, SF-36 and Patients' Global Impression of Change at three time points over 14 weeks. Clinical and demographical data were collected at baseline. Wound severity was collected at baseline and 14 weeks follow-up (T2). Confirmatory factor analyses showed acceptable fit of the hypothesised three-factor model (i.e., body, psyche and everyday life) of the Wound-QoL as long as we accepted two correlated error terms within the Body factor (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.