Stability and relative validity of the multiple sclerosis impact profile (MSIP)

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 30, Issue 14, 2008, Pages 1027-1038

  Wynia, K ^a,b   Middel, B ^a   De Ruiter, H ^b   Van Dijk, J P ^a   De Keyser, J H A ^b   Reijneveld, S A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b HANZE UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Criterion validity; Health impact measurement; Multiple Sclerosis Impact Profile (MSIP); Relative validity; Test retest reliability

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DISABILITY; DISEASE SEVERITY; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FUNCTIONING, DISABILITY AND HEALTH; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS IMPACT PROFILE; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; POSTAL MAIL; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SHORT FORM 36; STUDENT T TEST; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NETHERLANDS; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE;

EID: 47349117781     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: 14645165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09638280701476193     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. World Health Organization (WHO) (2001) International Classification of functioning, Disability and Health, ICF, World Health Organization, Geneva
2. Wynia, K., Middel, B., van Dijk, J. P., de Ruiter, H., Lok, W., De Keyser, J. H. and Reijneveld, S. A. (2006) Broadening the scope on health problems among the chronically neurologically ill with the International Classification of Functioning. Disabil Rehabilitation, 28, pp. 1445-1454.
3. World Health Organization Toward a common language for Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF, World Health Organization, Geneva
4. Briggs, S. R. and Cheek, J. M. (1986) The role of factor-analysis in the development and evaluation of Personality-Scales. J Personality, 54, pp. 106-148.
5. Clark, L. A. and Watson, D. (1995) Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psycholog Assess, 7, pp. 309-319.
6. Wynia, K., Middel, B., van Dijk, J. P., de Ruiter, H., De Keyser, J. and Reijneveld, S. A. The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Profile (MSIP).
7. The WHOQOL Group (1998) Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF Quality of Life Assessment. Psycholog Med, 28, pp. 551-558.
8. Kempen, G., Doeglas, D. and Suurmeijer, P. (1993) Groningen Activity Restriction Scale, Northern Centre for Health Care Research
9. Cardol, M., de Haan, R. J., van den Bos, G A, De Jong, B. A. and de Groot, I. J. (1999) The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: The Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA). Clin Rehabil, 13, pp. 411-419.
10. Cardol, M., de Haan, R. J., De Jong, B. A., van den Bos, G A and de Groot, I. J. (2001) Psychometric properties of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 82, pp. 210-216.
11. Ware, J. E. (2000) SF-36 health survey update. Spine, 25, pp. 3130-3139.
12. Laman, H. and Lankhorst, G. J. (1994) Subjective weighting of disability: An approach to quality of life assessment in rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil, 16, pp. 198-204.
13. Cohen, L., Pouwer, F., Pfennings, L. E., Lankhorst, G. J., van der Ploeg, H. M., Polman, C. H., Ader, H. J., Jonnson, A. and Vleugels, L. (1999) Factor structure of the Disability and Impact Profile in patients with multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res, 8, pp. 141-150.
14. Pfennings, L., Cohen, L., Miller, D., Gerbaud, L., Vleugels, L., Freeman, J., Vernay, D., Biolay, S., Ketelaer, P., Thompson, A., Polman, C. and van der Ploeg, H. (1999) Using the Short Form-36 with multiple sclerosis patients in five countries: A cross-cultural comparison. Psychol Rep, 85, pp. 19-31.
15. Ware, J. E. and Sherbourne, C. D. (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care, 30, pp. 473-483.
16. Pfennings, L., Cohen, L., van der Ploeg, H., Polman, C. and Lankhorst, G. (1998) Reliability of two measures of health-related quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis. Percept Mot Skills, 87, pp. 111-114.
17. Bowen, J., Gibbons, L., Gianas, A. and Kraft, G. H. (2001) Self-administered Expanded Disability Status Scale with functional system scores correlates well with a physician-administered test. Mult Scler, 7, pp. 201-206.
18. Kurtzke, J. F. (1983) Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: An Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology, 33, pp. 1444-1452.
19. Streiner, D. and Norman, G. (2003) Health measurement scales; a practical guide to their development and use, Oxford University Press, Oxford
20. Liang, M. H., Larson, M. G., Cullen, K. E. and Schwartz, J. A. (1985) Comparative measurement efficiency and sensitivity of 5 health-status instruments for arthritis research. Arthrit Rheumat, 28, pp. 542-547.
21. Vickrey, B. G., Hays, R. D., Genovese, B. J., Myers, L. W. and Ellison, G. W. (1997) Comparison of a generic to disease-targeted health-related quality-of-life measures for multiple sclerosis. J Clin Epidemiol, 50, pp. 557-569.
22. Ware, J. E., Kemp, J. P., Buchner, D. A., Singer, A. E., Nolop, K. B. and Goss, T. F. (1998) The responsiveness of disease-specific and generic health measures to changes in the severity of asthma among adults. Qual Life Res, 7, pp. 235-244.
23. Middel, B., de Greef, M., de Jongste, M. J., Crijns, H. J., Stewart, R. and van den Heuvel, W J (2002) Why don't we ask patients with coronary heart disease directly how much they have changed after treatment?. J Cardiopulm Rehabil, 22, pp. 47-52.
24. Cohen, J. (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences, Academic Press, New York
25. Middel, B., Stewart, R., Bouma, J., van Sonderen, E. and van den Heuvel, W JA (2001) How to validate clinically important change in health-related functional status. Is the magnitude of the effect size consistently related to magnitude of change as indicated by a global question rating?. J Evaluat Clin Pract, 7, pp. 399-410.
26. Hopkins Will, G (2002) A new view of statistics: Effect. Internet.
27. Newcombe, R. G. and Altman, D. G. (2005) Proportions and their differences. Statistics with confidence, pp. 45-56. British Medical Journal, Bristol
28. Lohr, K. N., Aaronson, N. K., Alonso, J., Burnam, M. A., Patrick, D. L., Perrin, E. B. and Roberts, J. S. (1996) Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: Development of scientific review criteria. Clin Therapeut, 18, pp. 979-992.
29. Cella, D. F., Dineen, K., Arnason, B., Reder, A., Webster, K. A., Karabatsos, G., Chang, C., Lloyd, S., Steward, J. and Stefoski, D. (1996) Validation of the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis quality of life instrument. Neurology, 47, pp. 129-139.
30. Vickrey, B. G., Hays, R. D., Harooni, R., Myers, L. W. and Ellison, G. W. (1995) A health-related quality of life measure for multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res, 4, pp. 187-206.
31. Benito-Leon, J., Morales, J. M., Rivera-Navarro, J. and Mitchell, A. (2003) A review about the impact of multiple sclerosis on health-related quality of life. Disabil Rehabil, 25, pp. 1291-1303.