Validation of the short forms of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire in Estonian
International Urogynecology Journal, ISSN: 1433-3023, Vol: 34, Issue: 9, Page: 2235-2240
2023
- 1Citations
- 7Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Introduction and hypothesis: Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) are reliable instruments for evaluating the quality of life in women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). They have been translated and validated in many languages. The study was aimed at validating the Estonian translations of the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 tools. Methods: The questionnaires were translated into Estonian using a multistep translation method. A total of 132 women were enrolled: patients with diagnosed POP (n=57) were allocated to test–retest reliability analyses, and those with no POP signs (n=88) completed the questionnaire only once. The total scores of questionnaires and their subscales of both patient and reference groups were compared. Item response rate, floor and ceiling effects, corrected item–total correlations, internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validity were analyzed. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Human Research of the University Clinic of Tartu, Estonia, and informed consent was obtained from each participant. Results: The translated questionnaires demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α values 0.77–0.93). The item response rate was 99%. Intra-class correlations (ICC) were strong for PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 and their subscales ranged from 0.86 to 0.96. Construct validity of the tools demonstrated by manyfold higher scores among patients with POP compared with women without POP (p<0.0001). Conclusions: The Estonian versions of the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 tools are reliable and valid instruments for assessing the quality of life in women with POP.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85152789697&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-023-05532-2; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37067571; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00192-023-05532-2; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-023-05532-2; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00192-023-05532-2
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know