Paper versus web-based administration of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7

盆底功能障碍量表20和盆底影响问卷7的纸质版与网络版管理方式比较

阅读:1

Abstract

Web-based questionnaires are increasingly employed for clinical research. To investigate whether web-based and paper versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7 (PFIQ-7) yield similar results, we compared results obtained with these two modes of administration. Women with pelvic floor disorders completed both versions of these questionnaires. Scores between modes of administration were compared using the paired t test and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Among the 52 participants, there were no significant differences in scores or scale scores between the web-based and paper questionnaires. The ICC was 0.91 for the PFDI-20 score and 0.81 for the PFIQ-7 score (p < 0.001 for each). The web-based format was preferred by 22 participants (53%), ten (24%) preferred the paper format, and nine (21%) had no preference. The acceptability and score equivalence recommend these web-based questionnaires as an alternative to paper questionnaires for clinical research.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。