Dataset Information

Validity and reliability of the Portuguese version of the modified Migraine Disability Assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) is a useful tool to measure headache-related disability. Modified MIDAS with 4-week recall period reduces recall bias and improves accuracy of the results. This study aimed at validating mMIDAS in Portuguese.

Methods

Studied population consisted of adult migraine patients attending a headache outpatient clinic. Reliability was assessed by internal consistency and reproducibility in a 3-week test-retest. Content validity was evaluated by two expert panels. Construct validity was tested by comparing mMIDAS-P index in socioeconomic and clinical patient groups and scale unidimensionality was evidenced by factor analysis. Criterion validity was tested using EQ-5D-5L and HADS.

Results

Ninety-two patients, 88% female, mean age of 44?years, participated. They had, in average, 9.7 headache days in previous month, pain averaging 7.5/10. About 69.9% were on a migraine prophylactic treatment, and 42.4% had severe disability; 29.4 and 13.0% showed, respectively, moderate/severe anxiety and depression. Content validity showed that mMIDAS-P is simple and clinically useful. It did not show to be determined by patient's sociodemographic characteristics and it was correlated with depression scale and EQ-5D-5L. Test-retest demonstrated high reproductive reliability and good internal consistency.

Conclusion

mMIDAS-P is valid and reliable. We strongly recommend it for clinical and research use.

SUBMITTER: Ferreira PL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7866748 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validity and reliability of the Portuguese version of the modified Migraine Disability Assessment.

Ferreira Pedro L PL Luzeiro Isabel I Lopes Margarida M Jorge André A Silva Bruno B Ferreira Lara L

BMC neurology 20210206 1

<h4>Background</h4>Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) is a useful tool to measure headache-related disability. Modified MIDAS with 4-week recall period reduces recall bias and improves accuracy of the results. This study aimed at validating mMIDAS in Portuguese.<h4>Methods</h4>Studied population consisted of adult migraine patients attending a headache outpatient clinic. Reliability was assessed by internal consistency and reproducibility in a 3-week test-retest. Content validity was e ...[more]

PMID: 33549045

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPediatric Migraine Disability Assessment (PedMIDAS) is one of the most frequently used questionnaires to assess disability from migraine in pediatric patients. This work aimed to evaluate the validity and test-retest reliability of the Arabic version of the child self-report versus the parent proxy report PedMIDAS. We also aimed to test the agreement between children's and parents' reports of the scale.MethodsPedMIDAS was subjected to translation and back-translation, then applied to 112 pediatric patients fulfilling the migraine diagnostic criteria. This cross-sectional study was conducted on two visits, one week apart. At visit 1, the following data were obtained from the included pediatric patients: disease duration, migraine type, current treatment regimen, monthly migraine days (MMD) during the last month preceding the enrollment, and migraine intensity using the visual analogue scale. Then, each child and his parent were independently asked to fill out PedMIDAS and Child Self-Report of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™ 4.0 (PedsQL™) to test the convergent validity of PedMIDAS. At visit 2, each child was requested to complete PedMIDAS again, and so was the parent to evaluate test-retest reliability.ResultsCronbach's alpha was estimated to be 0.94 for each instrument. For the child-self report PedMIDAS, the average measure intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) value was 0.992 (95%CI = 0.989-0.995), while it was estimated to be 0.990 for the parent-proxy report with 95%CI = 0.985-0.993, indicating excellent test-retest reliability for both instruments. The child-self report and the parent-proxy report PedMIDAS scores were significantly correlated with MMD, VAS, and all domains of the corresponding PedsQL, supporting convergent validity for both instruments. Agreement between parent and child on disability grading categories of PedMIDAS was substantial (κ = 0.644).ConclusionThe Arabic version of PedMIDAS was a valid and reliable instrument to assess disability from migraine in Arabic-speaking pediatric patients with migraine. Parent reports can be valuable as a complement to child reports for a comprehensive assessment of migraine.

Project description:BackgroundOswestry Disability Index (ODI) is broadly used in clinical and research settings for assessing the disability level in patients with lumbar radiculopathy but it has not been translated into Urdu language according to the pre-established translation guidelines as well as the validity and reliability of ODI Urdu version has not been tested yet. The aim of this study was to translate ODI in native Urdu language (ODI-U) according to recommended guidelines and to measure its psychometric properties in Urdu speaking patients suffering from lumber radiculopathy.MethodsOut of 108 participants, 54 were healthy (who filled ODI-U) and 54 were patients of lumber radiculopathy. The patients were administered through ODI-U, visual analogue scales for disability (VAS disability), pain intensity (VAS pain) and SF-36 at baseline and after 3 days. Reliability was investigated through test-retest method, internal consistency, standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC). ODI-U was assessed for exploratory factor analysis, construct (convergent and discriminative) validity and content validity. Alpha level < 0.05 was considered statistically significant and psychometric standards were evaluated contrary to priori hypothesis.ResultsODI-U revealed excellent test-retest reliability for total score (ICC2,1 = 0.95) and for all item (ICC2,1 = 0.72-0.98). Cronbach's alpha of 0.89 showed excellent internal consistency and moderate correlation between ODI-U total score and each item through spearman's correlation coefficient (r = 0.51-0.76). One factor structure was created, explaining 52.5% variance. There was no floor and ceiling effect of total ODI-U score. Content validity was assessed through conducting interviews with patients and incorporating expert's opinions. The discriminative validity was measured by independent sample t-test, where significant difference between healthy and patients (P < 0.001) was observed. The convergent validity was evaluated through Pearson's correlation showing moderate positive correlation of ODI-U with VAS pain (r = 0.49) and VAS disability (r = 0.51) but moderate negative correlation with all SF-36 domains (r = - 0.43to - 0.63).ConclusionODI-U showed adequate psychometric properties. ODI-U was found to be a reliable and a valid tool to measure the level of disability in Urdu-speaking patients with lumber radiculopathy.

Project description:Enabling patients with asthma to obtain the knowledge, confidence and skills they need in order to assume a major role in the management of their disease is cost effective. It should be an integral part of any plan for long-term control of asthma. The modified Patient Enablement Instrument (mPEI) is an easily administered questionnaire that was adapted in the United Kingdom to measure patient enablement in asthma, but its applicability in Portugal is not known. Validity and reliability of questionnaires should be tested before use in settings different from those of the original version. The purpose of this study was to test the applicability of the mPEI to Portuguese asthma patients after translation and cross-cultural adaptation, and to verify the structural validity, internal consistency and reproducibility of the instrument. The mPEI was translated to Portuguese and back translated to English. Its content validity was assessed by a debriefing interview with 10 asthma patients. The translated instrument was then administered to a random sample of 142 patients with persistent asthma. Structural validity and internal consistency were assessed. For reproducibility analysis, 86 patients completed the instrument again 7 days later. Item-scale correlations and exploratory factor analysis were used to assess structural validity. Cronbach's alpha was used to test internal consistency, and the intra-class correlation coefficient was used for the analysis of reproducibility. All items of the Portuguese version of the mPEI were found to be equivalent to the original English version. There were strong item-scale correlations that confirmed construct validity, with a one component structure and good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha >0.8) as well as high test-retest reliability (ICC=0.85). The mPEI showed sound psychometric properties for the evaluation of enablement in patients with asthma making it a reliable instrument for use in research and clinical practice in Portugal. Further studies are needed to confirm its responsiveness.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measures support health professionals in evaluating the results of clinical research and practice. The Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale (CNFDS) has shown promising measurement properties to measure disability in patients with neck pain, but an Italian version of this questionnaire is not available. The objective of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the CNFDS into Italian (CNFDS-I), and to assess its validity and reliability in patients with neck pain. METHODS:The CNFDS-I was developed according to well-established guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures. A cross-sectional clinimetric study was conducted to evaluate its validity and reliability. Patients with chronic neck pain (pain >?3 months) participated in this study. The following measurement properties (defined by the COSMIN initiative) were assessed: structural validity (exploratory factor analysis), internal consistency (Cronbach's ?), construct validity [by testing hypotheses on expected correlations with the Neck Disability Index (NDI), the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (NBQ), and pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)]. Test-retest reliability [Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for agreement (ICCagreement)], and measurement error [Smallest Detectable Change (SDC)] were also assessed in 50 clinically stable patients. Floor/ceiling effects and acceptability were calculated. RESULTS:One-hundred and sixty-two patients (mean age?=?47.9?±?14.5 years, 70% female) were included. The CNFDS-I exhibited sufficient unidimensionality (one factor explained 83% of the variability) and internal consistency (??=?0.83). Construct validity was sufficient as all correlations with the other questionnaires were as expected (r?=?0.846 with NDI, r?=?0.708 with NBQ, r?=?0.570 with VAS). Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICCagreement?=?0.99, 95% CI from 0.995 to 0.999), while measurement error was equal to 8.31 scale points (27% scale range). No floor/ceiling effects were detected. The average time for filling the questionnaire was two minutes. CONCLUSIONS:The CNFDS-I proved to be a valid and reliable outcome measure to assess disability in patients with chronic neck pain. Head-to-head comparison studies on the CNFDS-I measurement properties against other disability measures for neck pain (e.g. NDI and NBQ) are required to determine the relative merits of these different measures.

Dataset Information

Validity and reliability of the Portuguese version of the modified Migraine Disability Assessment.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Validity and reliability of the Portuguese version of the modified Migraine Disability Assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets