ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Chinese Version of the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS) in Older Patients with Urinary Incontinence After Prostate Cancer Surgery.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adherence is central to the effectiveness of prescribed pelvic floor muscle training after radical prostatectomy, yet standardized tools for assessing home-exercise adherence in older Chinese patients are limited. The Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS) is a brief patient-reported measure of adherence behavior. This study aimed to culturally adapt the EARS for Chinese use and evaluate its reliability and validity among older patients with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence. Methods: The EARS was translated and culturally adapted through forward translation, back-translation, multidisciplinary expert review, and pre-testing. Psychometric properties were evaluated in 177 older patients with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence. Content and structural validity were assessed using content validity indices and confirmatory factor analysis for ordered categorical data, respectively. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's α, odd-even split-half reliability, and two-week test-retest reliability in 30 participants. Pearson correlations examined associations between the supplementary reasons items and the six-item adherence score. Results: The mean six-item score was 15.71 ± 5.92. The item-level content validity index ranged from 0.883 to 1.000, and the average scale-level index was 0.990. The prespecified one-factor model showed good fit: comparative fit index = 1.000, Tucker-Lewis index = 1.013, root mean square error of approximation = 0.000 (90% confidence interval, 0.000-0.101), and standardized root mean square residual = 0.036. Standardized factor loadings ranged from 0.355 to 0.872 (all Conclusion: The EARS-C demonstrated satisfactory content validity, acceptable internal consistency, good reproducibility, and support for the original one-factor structure in this single-center sample. These findings support its use for assessing self-reported exercise adherence while independent multicenter confirmation is pursued.
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.