Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28895427›Full record

ArticleClinical rehabilitation2018

The impact of self-perceived limitations, stigma and sense of coherence on quality of life in multiple sclerosis patients: results of a cross-sectional study.

Feddrik Broersma, Barth Oeseburg, Jacob Dijkstra, Klaske Wynia

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rehabilitation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Feddrik Broersma1 Department of Health Sciences, Community and Occupational Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Barth Oeseburg2 Wenckebach Institute, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jacob Dijkstra3 Department of Sociology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Klaske Wynia1 Department of Health Sciences, Community and Occupational Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the impact of perceived limitations, stigma and sense of coherence on quality of life in multiple sclerosis patients.

designCross-sectional survey.

settingDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Multiple sclerosis patients. MAIN MEASURES: World Health Organization Quality of Life - abbreviated version, Stigma Scale for Chronic Illness, Sense of Coherence Scale, background and disease-related questions.

resultsIn total, 185 patients (61% response rate) participated in the study with moderate to severe limitations. Stigma was highly prevalent but low in severity. Patients with a higher sense of coherence experienced a lower level of limitations ( B = -0.063, P < 0.01) and less stigma (enacted stigma B = -0.030, P < 0.01; self-stigma B = -0.037, P < 0.01). Patients with a higher level of limitations experienced more stigma (enacted stigma B = 0.044, P < 0.05; self-stigma B = 0.063, P < 0.01). Patients with a higher sense of coherence experienced better quality of life (physical health B = 0.059, P < 0.01; psychological health B = 0.062, P < 0.01; social relationships B = 0.052, P < 0.01; environmental aspects B = 0.030, P < 0.01). Patients with a higher level of limitations experienced poorer quality of life (physical health B = -0.364, P < 0.01; psychological health B = -0.089, P < 0.05) and patients with more stigma also experienced poorer quality of life (self-stigma: physical health B = -0.073, P < 0.01; psychological health B = -0.089, P < 0.01; social relationships B = -0.124, P < 0.01; environmental aspects B = -0.052, P < 0.01, and enacted stigma: physical health B = -0.085, P < 0.10).

conclusionPatients with less perceived limitations and stigma and a higher level of sense of coherence experienced better quality of life. Patients with a higher sense of coherence experienced a lower level of limitations and less stigma.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeSelf ConceptSocial StigmaAdultAgedAge FactorsChronic DiseaseCross-Sectional StudiesDisability EvaluationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMobility LimitationMultiple SclerosisNetherlandsmultiple sclerosisquality of lifeSense of coherencestigma

Identifiers

PMID28895427
PMCPMC5865470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.