Cited by 622Migraine and Headache StudiesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationTemporomandibular Joint Disorders

Validity of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score in comparison to a diary-based measure in a population sample of migraine sufferers

Stewart, Walter F., Lipton, Richard B., Kolodner, Kenneth B., Sawyer, James, Lee, Clara, Liberman, Joshua N.·2000·Pain

Abstract

The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire is a brief, self-administered questionnaire designed to quantify headache-related disability over a 3 month period. The MIDAS score has been shown to have moderately high test-retest reliability in headache sufferers and is correlated with clinical judgment regarding the need for medical care. The aim of the study was to examine the validity of the MIDAS score, and the five items comprising the score, compared to data from a 90 day daily diary used, in part, to record acute disability from headache. In a population-based sample, 144 clinically diagnosed migraine headache sufferers were enrolled in a 90 day diary study and completed the MIDAS questionnaire at the end of the study. The daily diary was used to record detailed information on headache features as well as activity limitations in work, household chores, and non-work activities (social, family and leisure activities). The MIDAS score was the sum of missed work or school days, missed household chores days, missed non-work activity days, and days at work or school plus days of household chores where productivity was reduced by half or more in the last 3 months. Validity was assessed by comparing MIDAS items and the MIDAS score with equivalent measures derived from the diary. The MIDAS items for missed days of work or school (mean 0.96, median 0) and for missed days of household work (mean 3.64, median 2.0) were similar to the corresponding diary-based estimates of missed work or school (mean 1.23, median 0) and of missed household work (mean 3.93, median 2.01). Values for missed days of non-work activities (MIDAS mean 2.6 and median 1 versus diary mean 2.22 and median 0.95) were also similar. Responses to MIDAS questions about number of days where productivity was reduced by half or more in work (mean 3.77, median 2.00) and in household work (mean 3.92, median 2.00) significantly overestimated the corresponding diary-based measures for work (mean 2.94, median 1.06) and household work (mean 2.22, median 0.98). Nonetheless, the overall MIDAS score (mean 14.53, median 9.0) was not significantly different form the reference diary-based measure (mean 13.5, median 8.4). The correlation between the MIDAS summary score and an equivalent diary score was 0.63. The group estimate of the MIDAS score was found to be a valid estimate of a rigorous diary-based measure of disability. The mean and median values for the MIDAS score in a population-based sample of migraine cases were similar to equivalent diary measures. The correlation between the two measures was in the low moderate range, but expected given that two very different methods of data collection were compared.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3959(00)00305-5

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stewart, W. F., Lipton, R. B., Kolodner, K. B., Sawyer, J., Lee, C., & Liberman, J. N.
Affiliations
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Stewart, Walter F.
Venue
Pain
Published
2000-10
Volume
88
Issue
1
Pages
41-52
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1984102564
Cited by
622
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 9
FWCI
11.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Migraine and Headache Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Complementary and Manual Therapy › Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
Keywords
migraine, headache-related disability, questionnaire validity, housework, activity limitation, self-report measures, test-retest reliability, health-related quality of life
MeSH terms
Absenteeism, Adult, Disability Evaluation, Efficiency, Female, Humans, Male, Medical Records, Middle Aged, Migraine Disorders, Surveys and Questionnaires

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review