ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
Development of a menopause-specific questionnaire: Content and face validation using a modified Delphi technique.
Article in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundMenopause is a universal life stage, yet many women face persistent knowledge gaps, misconceptions, and unequal access to care. Existing instruments assess isolated aspects of menopause but do not capture women's access to the conditions necessary for making informed choices about their health.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and establish content and face validity of a menopause-specific questionnaire designed to assess women's access to the preconditions for making informed choices about their health during the menopausal transition and beyond, using a modified Delphi technique.DesignA modified Delphi study.MethodsFive Delphi rounds were conducted in 2025 involving an expert group (n = 9), a Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) group (n = 7), and a pilot test group (n = 48). Experts reviewed and refined an initial 39-item draft, the PPI group assessed face validity and readability, and experts conducted item prioritization using predefined consensus thresholds. Pilot testing evaluated usability and respondent burden. Final consensus required ≥80% expert agreement. The study followed CREDES guidelines.ResultsFollowing content and face validation, the final instrument comprised 29 items. Expert review informed revisions to terminology, neutrality of menopausal hormone therapy items, and language accessibility. PPI contributors highlighted readability challenges and supported clearer wording. Nine items were removed, five merged into two, and one item added. Pilot testing confirmed acceptable usability and respondent burden. Final expert consensus reached 87.5%.ConclusionA consensus-based, user-informed questionnaire was developed, following content and face validation, to assess women's access to conditions for informed choice during menopause. The instrument may support the identification of barriers and facilitators to informed decision-making in menopause-related care and research.
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.