Validation and reliability of the Turkish version of the inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire for ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) impairs patients' quality of life (QoL). Inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (IBDQ) is created to measure the health-related QoL specific for IBD. We planned to investigate the validation and reliability of the Turkish translation of IBDQ. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients filled self-report questionnaires (Turkish Inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (TrIBDQ) and Short Form-36 (SF-36)) themselves under a physician's supervision, and they were free to ask questions about the questionnaires. The participants then filled the same questionnaire after at least two weeks. Construct validity, discriminant ability, reliability, and susceptibility to change were analyzed separately for the IBD patients. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess test-retest reliability. Cronbach's alpha values were used to assess internal consistency. RESULTS: A hundred patients enrolled in the study, 53 with Crohn's disease (CD), 47 with ulcerative colitis (UC). We found a moderate to high positive correlation between the TrIBDQ domains and the SF-36 dimensions. In UC and CD, TrIBDQ was able to differentiate active disease and remission. We found Cronbach's alpha for TrIBDQ domains ranged from 0.76-0.94 in CD and from 0.79-0.92 in UC. The total Cronbach's alpha for TrIBDQ was 0.96 in CD and 0.95 in UC. Sensitivity-to-change analyses of the bowel, systemic, and emotional scores showed statistically significant differences between their baseline and follow-up values. CONCLUSION: TrIBDQ is a valid and reliable tool for assessing the quality of life in Turkish speaking IBD patients. Thus it can be used in clinical research and practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".