Physician Assistant

Scopus Publication Detail

The publication detail shows the title, authors (with indicators showing other profiled authors), information on the publishing organization, abstract and a link to the article in Scopus. This abstract is what is used to create the fingerprint of the publication.

Validation of web-based administration of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)

Brent A. Parnell; Gena C. Dunivan; Annamarie Connolly; Mary L. Jannelli; Ellen C. Wells; Elizabeth J. Geller (Profiled Author: Brent A Parnell)

International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction. 2011;22(3):357-361.

Introduction and hypothesis: We studied a web-based version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Methods: A randomized crossover study in which subjects completed both a web-based and paper-based version of the PISQ-12, with a 2-week separation between the completion of the two versions. Demographic data and questionnaire preferences were also assessed. Group 1 completed the web version first, and group 2 completed the paper version first. Results: We recruited 52 women and 50 (96.2%) completed the study. Demographic data were similar for the two groups. There was no difference in total PISQ-12 score (P = 0.41) and a high degree of correlation between versions (r = 0.88). Women preferred the web-based PISQ-12 (77.6%) over the paper-based version. Conclusion: The web-based version of the PISQ-12 is a reliable alternative to the standard paper-based version and was preferred by women in this study regardless of age, race, and education. © 2010 The International Urogynecological Association.

PMID: 20972537    

Scientific Context

This section shows information related to the publication - computed using the fingerprint of the publication - including related publications, related experts with fingerprints representing significant amounts of overlap between their fingerprint and this publication. The red dots indicate whether those experts or terms appear within the publication, thereby showing potential and actual connections.