ReviewArquivos de gastroenterologia2026
DESIGN AND VALIDATION OF A BUNDLE FOR ASSESSING GONADAL FUNCTION IN INDIVIDUALS WITH LIVER CIRRHOSIS.
Review in Arquivos de gastroenterologia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver cirrhosis (LC) constitutes the final stage of various chronic liver diseases and represents a serious public health problem. Its pathophysiology involves an inflammatory and fibrotic process that culminates in liver dysfunction and several systemic repercussions, including gonadal dysfunction with consequent hormonal alterations. Despite the clinical importance of this condition, there is a lack of studies that systematically address the assessment of gonadal function in men with LC, justifying the development of specific instruments for this purpose.
objectiveThis study aimed to construct and validate a package for assessing gonadal function in men with LC.
methodsA methodological approach divided into stages of construction and validation of the proposed instrument was used. Initially, an integrative review was conducted using 21 included articles to identify the main clinical and laboratory parameters associated with gonadal dysfunction in men with cirrhosis. These parameters formed the basis for the development of the instrument package, which is structured around three axes: clinical manifestations, laboratory tests, and management of gonadal dysfunction. The instrument underwent content validation by 11 expert judges, selected according to standardized expertise criteria. The evaluation was carried out using a single questionnaire on the Google Forms platform, where judges, based on a Likert scale, assigned scores from 0 to 4 to assess the three domains of the package: i) Objectives; ii) Structure and Presentation; iii) Relevance. Data were analyzed using SPSS 23, employing the Index of Agreement (IA), the Exact Binomial Distribution test (P>0.05), and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) to determine reliability.
resultsValidation of the package showed excellent agreement among those evaluated, with a total confidence interval of 98.8% and an ICC of 0.814, demonstrating high reliability of the instrument. All evaluated domains obtained agreement greater than 80%, and the binomial distribution test indicated that the observed agreement proportion was not significantly lower than the predetermined value of 80% (P>0.05). The main suggestions from the experts focused on improving the visual and functional aspects of the material, including flowcharts, detailing the procedures, and multidisciplinary integration.
conclusionThe results confirm the content validity and theoretical consistency of the instrument, establishing it as a useful environmental tool for standardizing the assessment of gonadal function in men with LC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.