Cited by 124Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesCancer survivorship and careResilience and Mental Health

Coping and Quality of Life in One Hundred and Thirty Five Subjects with Multiple Sclerosis

Montel, S.R., Bungener, C.·2007·Multiple Sclerosis Journal

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: and objective The aim of this study was to compare coping strategies and quality of life (QoL) in multiple sclerosis (MS), as they relate to the course of the disease (relapsing-remitting (RR), secondary progressive (SP), primary progressive (PP)), while taking depression and anxiety into account. METHODS: A total of 135 MS subjects were seen for a semi-structured interview in order to collect socio-demographic and clinical information, after which there was an assessment of their mental and cognitive states (Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Depressive Mood Scale (EHD), Hamilton Anxiety (HAMA), Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB)). All subjects then completed three self-report questionnaires; two about coping strategies (Ways of Coping Checklist (WCC), Coping with Health, Injuries and Problems Scale (CHIP)) and one about QoL (SEP59). RESULTS: The mental health (depression and anxiety) and the psychological and social dimensions of QoL were relatively unaffected. However, after controlling for age and disability, the disease course had a strong effect on both mental health and QoL, with the poorest condition for SPMS and the best condition for PPMS. The SPMS patients tend to use emotional coping strategies extensively, while the PPMS patients use more instrumental strategies. DISCUSSION: Our study clearly demonstrated that psychological and social well-being were substantially affected by the disease course. These results encourage us to develop interventions focused on coping strategies and which are better adapted to individual patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1352458506071170

Cites

54 of 54 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
Montel, S. R., & Bungener, C.
Affiliations
  • Université Paris Cité (FR)
  • Université Paris Descartes (FR)
Venue
Multiple Sclerosis Journal
Published
2007-04
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
393-401
ISSN
  • 1352-4585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0970
OpenAlex
W2083489672
Cited by
124
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 15
FWCI
6.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Multiple Sclerosis Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, coping strategies, quality of life, clinical course, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, secondary progressive multiple sclerosis, primary progressive multiple sclerosis, depression, anxiety, emotional coping, instrumental coping, disability
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Personality Inventory, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive, Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting

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