Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42340397›Full record

ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2026

Content Validity of Measurement Instruments Used to Assess Patient Quality of Life (QoL) in Women with Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review.

Isabelle Legood, Christina Pagkaki, Subanhey Thiyagalingam, Maria Patricia Roman, Gabriele Falconi, Cornelia Betschart, Stergios K Doumouchtsis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Isabelle LegoodUniversity Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, UK.
Christina PagkakiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK. christinapagkaki@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-4874-7007
Subanhey ThiyagalingamDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.
Maria Patricia Roman2nd Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology, "Iuliu Hatieganu" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Gabriele FalconiComplex Operative Unit of Gynecology, Fondazione Policlinico Tor Vergata University Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Cornelia BetschartDepartment of Gynecology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Stergios K DoumouchtsisDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisStress urinary incontinence (SUI) significantly affects women's quality of life (QoL). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used to assess QoL; however, the content validity of many instruments has not been systematically evaluated in women with SUI. This study aimed to evaluate the content validity of PROMs used to assess QoL in women with SUI.

methodsEMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to December 2025. Additional records were identified through hand-searching Google Scholar. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies describing PROM development or evaluating content validity of PROMs assessing QoL or the impact of urinary symptoms in women with SUI were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data using a standardised form, and assessed methodological quality using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Evidence for relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility was synthesised, and quality of evidence graded using a modified GRADE approach.

resultsNineteen studies describing 22 PROMs were included. Methodological quality of PROM development was rated as inadequate for 21 instruments. Only one PROM had been developed specifically for women with SUI. Concept elicitation was inadequate for most instruments and patient involvement in development was limited. Evidence supporting content validity varied across PROMs.

conclusionEvidence supporting the content validity of PROMs used in women with SUI is heterogeneous and often limited. Greater adherence to COSMIN guidance is needed to ensure instruments adequately capture patient-relevant outcomes.

Indexed as

Content validityCOSMINPatient reported outcome measuresStress urinary incontinenceSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42340397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.