Cited by 183Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeCancer survivorship and care

Depression is the main determinant of quality of life in multiple sclerosis: a classification-regression (CART) study

D'Alisa, S., Miscio, G., Baudo, S., Simone, A., Tesio, L., Mauro, A.·2006·Disability and Rehabilitation

Abstract

PURPOSE: Quality of life in multiple sclerosis has been often measured through the SF-36 questionnaire. In this study, validation of the SF-36 summary scores, its 'physical' component, and its 'mental' component was attempted by exploring the joint predictive power of disability (EDSS score), of anxiety and depression (HADS-A and -D scores, respectively), and of disease duration, progression type, age, gender and marital status. METHOD: The sample consisted of 75 patients suffering from multiple sclerosis admitted to an inpatient rehabilitation unit. The interplay between potential predictors was assessed through a particular regression model (classification and regression tree, CART). Two main advantages of this technique are its robustness with respect to distributional assumptions (rarely met by scores coming in from questionnaires) and its sensitivity to high-order interactions, between independent variables, difficult to detect through conventional multiple regression. RESULTS: Predictive variables for physical component of the SF-36 were EDSS and HADS-D (36.8% variance explanation). The only predictive variable for mental component of SF-36 was HADS-D (39.1% variance explanation). CONCLUSION: Results confirm previous findings showing that in patients with multiple sclerosis quality of life is heavily determined by person's mood, whatever his/her neurological or functional severity. The usefulness and validity of the SF-36 as an index representative of quality of life is debatable, as long as depression explains much of its variance. Further refinement of quality of life definition and measurement is worth further psychometric and statistical research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09638280500191753

Cites

48 of 48 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
D'Alisa, S., Miscio, G., Baudo, S., Simone, A., Tesio, L., & Mauro, A.
Affiliations
IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano (IT)
Corresponding author
D'Alisa, S.
Venue
Disability and Rehabilitation
Published
2006-01
Volume
28
Issue
5
Pages
307-314
ISSN
  • 0963-8288 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5165
OpenAlex
W2006486879
Cited by
182
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 8
FWCI
2.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Disability and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, quality of life, depression, anxiety, SF-36, Expanded Disability Status Scale, inpatient rehabilitation, disability severity, disease duration, psychometric validation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Decision Trees, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis

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