Validation of the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis quality of life instrument

Based on scientific literature and interviews with clinicians and patients, we developed a quality of life instrument for use with people with MS called the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis (FAMS). The initial item pool consisted of 88 questions: 28 from the general version of the Functio...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neurology 1996-07, Vol.47 (1), p.129-139
Hauptverfasser: CELLA, D. F, DINEEN, K, STEFOSKI, D, ARNASON, B, REDER, A, WEBSTER, K. A, KARABATSOS, G, CHANG, C, LLOYD, S, MO, F, STEWART, J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 139
container_issue 1
container_start_page 129
container_title Neurology
container_volume 47
creator CELLA, D. F
DINEEN, K
STEFOSKI, D
ARNASON, B
REDER, A
WEBSTER, K. A
KARABATSOS, G
CHANG, C
LLOYD, S
MO, F
STEWART, J
description Based on scientific literature and interviews with clinicians and patients, we developed a quality of life instrument for use with people with MS called the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis (FAMS). The initial item pool consisted of 88 questions: 28 from the general version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy quality of life instrument, plus 60 generated by patients, providers, and literature review. The validation samples comprised a mail survey cohort (N = 377) and a clinical cohort (N = 56). Both cohorts provides evidence for internal consistency of the derived subscales, test-retest reliability, content validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity. Principal components and Rasch measurement model analyses were applied sequentially to survey sample data, reducing test length to 44 questions, divided into six subscales: mobility, symptoms, emotional well-being (depression), general contentment, thinking/fatigue, and family/social well-being. Fifteen initially rejected questions were added back as miscellaneous (unscored) questions for their potential clinical and empirical value. The mobility subscale was strongly predictive of the Kurtzke Extended Disability Status Scale and the Scripps Neurologic Rating Scales. The other five subscales were not, indicating they measure aspects of patient quality of life not captured by the neurologic exam. The final 59-item English language instrument (FAMS version 2) is available for inclusion in clinical trials and clinical practice.
doi_str_mv 10.1212/wnl.47.1.129
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78158379</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>78158379</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-d83a7a9752a657ac9a6cedce25589a98e95ed2c8cb81dcc0c9a66acdd92240cd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kE1LxDAQhoMo67p68yr0IJ7smqRNkxxl8QsWvfixtzKbpBhJ291Oiuy_t2UXT8PL88wwvIRcMjpnnPG73ybMczlnQ9JHZMoEL9Ii46tjMqWUqzRTUp2SM8QfSgco9YRMlGSUFsWUrD4heAvRt03SVkn8dknVN2bMEBJAdIi1a-II6z5EvwkuQRNc16LHZNsP63E30uArl_gGY9ePC-fkpIKA7uIwZ-Tj8eF98Zwu355eFvfL1OQ8j6lVGUjQUnAohASjoTDOGseFUBq0clo4y40ya8WsMXQUCjDWas5zamw2Izf7u5uu3fYOY1l7NC4EaFzbYykVEyqTehBv96IZXsfOVeWm8zV0u5LRciyy_Hpdlrks2ZBG_epwt1_Xzv7Lh-YGfn3ggAZC1UFjPP5rGRMF1yL7A-oufcc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>78158379</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validation of the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis quality of life instrument</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>CELLA, D. F ; DINEEN, K ; STEFOSKI, D ; ARNASON, B ; REDER, A ; WEBSTER, K. A ; KARABATSOS, G ; CHANG, C ; LLOYD, S ; MO, F ; STEWART, J</creator><creatorcontrib>CELLA, D. F ; DINEEN, K ; STEFOSKI, D ; ARNASON, B ; REDER, A ; WEBSTER, K. A ; KARABATSOS, G ; CHANG, C ; LLOYD, S ; MO, F ; STEWART, J</creatorcontrib><description>Based on scientific literature and interviews with clinicians and patients, we developed a quality of life instrument for use with people with MS called the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis (FAMS). The initial item pool consisted of 88 questions: 28 from the general version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy quality of life instrument, plus 60 generated by patients, providers, and literature review. The validation samples comprised a mail survey cohort (N = 377) and a clinical cohort (N = 56). Both cohorts provides evidence for internal consistency of the derived subscales, test-retest reliability, content validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity. Principal components and Rasch measurement model analyses were applied sequentially to survey sample data, reducing test length to 44 questions, divided into six subscales: mobility, symptoms, emotional well-being (depression), general contentment, thinking/fatigue, and family/social well-being. Fifteen initially rejected questions were added back as miscellaneous (unscored) questions for their potential clinical and empirical value. The mobility subscale was strongly predictive of the Kurtzke Extended Disability Status Scale and the Scripps Neurologic Rating Scales. The other five subscales were not, indicating they measure aspects of patient quality of life not captured by the neurologic exam. The final 59-item English language instrument (FAMS version 2) is available for inclusion in clinical trials and clinical practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0028-3878</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-632X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1212/wnl.47.1.129</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8710066</identifier><identifier>CODEN: NEURAI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hagerstown, MD: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Biological and medical sciences ; Humans ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Multiple Sclerosis - physiopathology ; Multiple sclerosis and variants. Guillain barré syndrome and other inflammatory polyneuropathies. Leukoencephalitis ; Neurology ; Quality of Life ; Reproducibility of Results ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>Neurology, 1996-07, Vol.47 (1), p.129-139</ispartof><rights>1996 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-d83a7a9752a657ac9a6cedce25589a98e95ed2c8cb81dcc0c9a66acdd92240cd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-d83a7a9752a657ac9a6cedce25589a98e95ed2c8cb81dcc0c9a66acdd92240cd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=3156295$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8710066$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>CELLA, D. F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DINEEN, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STEFOSKI, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ARNASON, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>REDER, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WEBSTER, K. A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KARABATSOS, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHANG, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LLOYD, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MO, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STEWART, J</creatorcontrib><title>Validation of the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis quality of life instrument</title><title>Neurology</title><addtitle>Neurology</addtitle><description>Based on scientific literature and interviews with clinicians and patients, we developed a quality of life instrument for use with people with MS called the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis (FAMS). The initial item pool consisted of 88 questions: 28 from the general version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy quality of life instrument, plus 60 generated by patients, providers, and literature review. The validation samples comprised a mail survey cohort (N = 377) and a clinical cohort (N = 56). Both cohorts provides evidence for internal consistency of the derived subscales, test-retest reliability, content validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity. Principal components and Rasch measurement model analyses were applied sequentially to survey sample data, reducing test length to 44 questions, divided into six subscales: mobility, symptoms, emotional well-being (depression), general contentment, thinking/fatigue, and family/social well-being. Fifteen initially rejected questions were added back as miscellaneous (unscored) questions for their potential clinical and empirical value. The mobility subscale was strongly predictive of the Kurtzke Extended Disability Status Scale and the Scripps Neurologic Rating Scales. The other five subscales were not, indicating they measure aspects of patient quality of life not captured by the neurologic exam. The final 59-item English language instrument (FAMS version 2) is available for inclusion in clinical trials and clinical practice.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multiple Sclerosis - physiopathology</subject><subject>Multiple sclerosis and variants. Guillain barré syndrome and other inflammatory polyneuropathies. Leukoencephalitis</subject><subject>Neurology</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>0028-3878</issn><issn>1526-632X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kE1LxDAQhoMo67p68yr0IJ7smqRNkxxl8QsWvfixtzKbpBhJ291Oiuy_t2UXT8PL88wwvIRcMjpnnPG73ybMczlnQ9JHZMoEL9Ii46tjMqWUqzRTUp2SM8QfSgco9YRMlGSUFsWUrD4heAvRt03SVkn8dknVN2bMEBJAdIi1a-II6z5EvwkuQRNc16LHZNsP63E30uArl_gGY9ePC-fkpIKA7uIwZ-Tj8eF98Zwu355eFvfL1OQ8j6lVGUjQUnAohASjoTDOGseFUBq0clo4y40ya8WsMXQUCjDWas5zamw2Izf7u5uu3fYOY1l7NC4EaFzbYykVEyqTehBv96IZXsfOVeWm8zV0u5LRciyy_Hpdlrks2ZBG_epwt1_Xzv7Lh-YGfn3ggAZC1UFjPP5rGRMF1yL7A-oufcc</recordid><startdate>19960701</startdate><enddate>19960701</enddate><creator>CELLA, D. F</creator><creator>DINEEN, K</creator><creator>STEFOSKI, D</creator><creator>ARNASON, B</creator><creator>REDER, A</creator><creator>WEBSTER, K. A</creator><creator>KARABATSOS, G</creator><creator>CHANG, C</creator><creator>LLOYD, S</creator><creator>MO, F</creator><creator>STEWART, J</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19960701</creationdate><title>Validation of the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis quality of life instrument</title><author>CELLA, D. F ; DINEEN, K ; STEFOSKI, D ; ARNASON, B ; REDER, A ; WEBSTER, K. A ; KARABATSOS, G ; CHANG, C ; LLOYD, S ; MO, F ; STEWART, J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-d83a7a9752a657ac9a6cedce25589a98e95ed2c8cb81dcc0c9a66acdd92240cd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multiple Sclerosis - physiopathology</topic><topic>Multiple sclerosis and variants. Guillain barré syndrome and other inflammatory polyneuropathies. Leukoencephalitis</topic><topic>Neurology</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>CELLA, D. F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DINEEN, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STEFOSKI, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ARNASON, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>REDER, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WEBSTER, K. A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KARABATSOS, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHANG, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LLOYD, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MO, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>STEWART, J</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Neurology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>CELLA, D. F</au><au>DINEEN, K</au><au>STEFOSKI, D</au><au>ARNASON, B</au><au>REDER, A</au><au>WEBSTER, K. A</au><au>KARABATSOS, G</au><au>CHANG, C</au><au>LLOYD, S</au><au>MO, F</au><au>STEWART, J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validation of the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis quality of life instrument</atitle><jtitle>Neurology</jtitle><addtitle>Neurology</addtitle><date>1996-07-01</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>129</spage><epage>139</epage><pages>129-139</pages><issn>0028-3878</issn><eissn>1526-632X</eissn><coden>NEURAI</coden><abstract>Based on scientific literature and interviews with clinicians and patients, we developed a quality of life instrument for use with people with MS called the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis (FAMS). The initial item pool consisted of 88 questions: 28 from the general version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy quality of life instrument, plus 60 generated by patients, providers, and literature review. The validation samples comprised a mail survey cohort (N = 377) and a clinical cohort (N = 56). Both cohorts provides evidence for internal consistency of the derived subscales, test-retest reliability, content validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity. Principal components and Rasch measurement model analyses were applied sequentially to survey sample data, reducing test length to 44 questions, divided into six subscales: mobility, symptoms, emotional well-being (depression), general contentment, thinking/fatigue, and family/social well-being. Fifteen initially rejected questions were added back as miscellaneous (unscored) questions for their potential clinical and empirical value. The mobility subscale was strongly predictive of the Kurtzke Extended Disability Status Scale and the Scripps Neurologic Rating Scales. The other five subscales were not, indicating they measure aspects of patient quality of life not captured by the neurologic exam. The final 59-item English language instrument (FAMS version 2) is available for inclusion in clinical trials and clinical practice.</abstract><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>8710066</pmid><doi>10.1212/wnl.47.1.129</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0028-3878
ispartof Neurology, 1996-07, Vol.47 (1), p.129-139
issn 0028-3878
1526-632X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78158379
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Adult
Aged
Biological and medical sciences
Humans
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Multiple Sclerosis - physiopathology
Multiple sclerosis and variants. Guillain barré syndrome and other inflammatory polyneuropathies. Leukoencephalitis
Neurology
Quality of Life
Reproducibility of Results
Surveys and Questionnaires
title Validation of the functional assessment of multiple sclerosis quality of life instrument
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-12T15%3A04%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validation%20of%20the%20functional%20assessment%20of%20multiple%20sclerosis%20quality%20of%20life%20instrument&rft.jtitle=Neurology&rft.au=CELLA,%20D.%20F&rft.date=1996-07-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=129&rft.epage=139&rft.pages=129-139&rft.issn=0028-3878&rft.eissn=1526-632X&rft.coden=NEURAI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1212/wnl.47.1.129&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E78158379%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=78158379&rft_id=info:pmid/8710066&rfr_iscdi=true