Cited by 48Migraine and Headache StudiesHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealth Education and Validation

The Development and Psychometric Properties of the MSQOL: A Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Instrument

McKenna, Stephen P., Doward, Lynda C., Davey, Kate Mackenzie·1998·Clinical Drug Investigation

Abstract

This paper describes the development and testing of the UK version of the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life instrument (MSQOL), a measure designed to assess the quality of life of migraineurs. The work was part of an international research study conducted in eight countries, with the initial development work conducted in the UK and the USA. In the UK, interviews were held with 30 patients with migraine, while in the USA, 25 individual interviews were conducted, along with one focus group with 5 participants. Transcripts were produced of the interviews/group discussion and these were used to determine the questionnaire items, which were then considered by an international translation panel. The panel considered the feasibility of translating the items into other European languages. The instrument was then assessed for reliability and validity. The UK version of the MSQOL was shown to have excellent test-retest reliability (0.93 over 2 weeks) and internal consistency (0.92 and 0.93 on the first and second administrations, respectively). Scores on the measure were also found to be related to a comparator measure of well-being and to perceived severity of migraine and disruption caused to patients by the disease. Findings for the other language versions of the MSQOL supported those from the UK, suggesting that the instrument may well be suitable for inclusion in clinical trials.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2165/00044011-199815050-00006

Cites

37 of 37 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

1 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McKenna, S. P., Doward, L. C., & Davey, K. M.
Affiliations
Galen Research (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
McKenna, Stephen P.
Venue
Clinical Drug Investigation
Published
1998
Volume
15
Issue
5
Pages
413-423
ISSN
  • 0114-2402 (ISSN-L)
  • 1173-2563
OpenAlex
W200404158
Cited by
48
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Drug Investigation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Migraine and Headache Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
Keywords
migraine, quality of life, patient-reported outcome measures, questionnaire development, psychometric properties, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, cross-cultural translation, patient interviews, disease severity, well-being

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