| Title |
Adaptation and validation of the Michigan Incontinence Severity Index in a Turkish population
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s106209 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mehmet Akif Sargın, Murat Yassa, Bilge Dogan Taymur, Emrah Ergun, Gizem Akca, Niyazi Tug |
| Abstract |
To translate and validate the Michigan Incontinence Severity Index (M-ISI) for its use in Turkish-speaking women with urinary incontinence. The translation and cross-cultural adaptation were based on international guidelines. Content validity by content validity ratio/content validity index, internal consistency by Cronbach's alpha, test-retest reliability by Pearson's correlation, and construct validity by using Spearman rank correlations to show the relationship between individual items and the relevant domains and subdomains were analyzed in 100 female participants with a chief complaint of urinary incontinence. Correlations between the relevant scores of M-ISI and The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form scores were analyzed to indicate convergent validity. The Varimax rotation method was used to conduct exploratory factor analysis in order to investigate the factor structures/distribution of M-ISI items. Content validity index and content validity ratio values increased to 0.97 and 1.00, respectively, showing sufficient content validity of the Turkish version of the M-ISI. The analysis formed three factors which was slightly different from original developers. In our proposed three-factor construct, all of the ten items demonstrated high correlations with their subdomains and lower correlations with the other domains, indicating good construct validity. Correlations between stress urinary incontinence and urge urinary incontinence (UUI) scores and The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form scores were found high, which indicated convergent validity (r: 0.953, P<0.001). Good internal consistency of the scores for each subdomain was observed (stress urinary incontinence, 0.787; UUI, 0.862; pad usage and bother, 0.832). Test-retest reliability was shown for each subdomain (stress urinary incontinence, 0.973; UUI, 0.973; pad usage and bother, 0.979). The translated and cross-culturally adapted M-ISI showed good validity, reproducibility, and reliability that allow its use in Turkish-speaking populations with urinary incontinence. Its comprehensive structure means that it has become a practical instrument that is available for utilization in the primary health care setting, clinical research, and epidemiological trials in Turkey. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 17% |
| Psychology | 2 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 May 2016.
All research outputs
#18,461,618
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,298
of 1,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,415
of 298,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#62
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,605 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.