Observational studyPloS one2018
A new measure to assess pain in people with haemophilia: The Multidimensional Haemophilia Pain Questionnaire (MHPQ).
Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of hypnosis for pain management and promotion of health-related quality-of-life among people with haemophilia: a randomised controlled pilot trial.Scientific reports · 2019Trial
- Construction of a Shared Decision-Making Program for Chronic Pain Management in Adult Patients with Hemophilic Arthropathy.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Patient-Centred Management of Well-Controlled Haemophilia: Obtaining Opinions and Definitions Through a Delphi Consensus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Etranacogene Dezaparvovec Gene Therapy for Hemophilia B Treatment in the USA.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Subjective Physical Performance and Its Determinants in Patients With Haemophilia.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia · 2025Article
- Perioperative Pain Management in Hemophilic Patient Undergoing Orthopedic Surgery: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Pain: a neglected symptom in hemophilia.Annals of hematology · 2023Observational
- Hemophilic Arthropathy: Barriers to Early Diagnosis and Management.Journal of blood medicine · 2022Review
- Pain management in hemophilia: expert recommendations.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2021Review
- Use of the Multidimensional Haemophilia Pain Questionnaire (MHPQ) in Patients With Severe Haemophilia A Treated With Emicizumab: A Pilot Cross-Sectional, Single-Centre Study.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of HemophiliaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People with haemophilia (PWH) experience acute pain during joint bleeds and might develop chronic pain due to joint degeneration. However, there is a lack of standardized measures to comprehensively assess pain in PWH. This study aimed to develop a multidimensional questionnaire for haemophilia-related pain, the Multidimensional Haemophilia Pain Questionnaire (MHPQ), and to present initial validation data among adults.The questionnaire distinguishes between acute/chronic pain and queries about pain locations, duration, frequency, triggering factors, intensity, interference, strategies, specialists for pain management and satisfaction with treatment. An initial version was tested with 16 patients to ensure item comprehensibility and face validity. The final version was answered by 104 adults, with 82 (78.8%) reporting haemophilia-related pain in the previous year (mean age = 43.17; SD = 13.00). The non-response analysis revealed good item acceptability. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA/CFA), reliability (internal consistency, test-retest, inter-item and item-total correlations) and convergent validity were analysed for the intensity and interference dimensions of the questionnaire. A combined EFA with these two constructs supported a 2-factor structure distinguishing intensity (α = 0.88) from interference items (α = 0.91). CFA was tested for the interference dimension, demonstrating suitability for this sample. Item-total correlations were >0.30 on both dimensions and most inter-item correlations were <0.70. Test-retest reliability (n = 42) was good for intensity (r = 0.88) and interference (r = 0.73), and convergent validity was confirmed for most hypotheses (r>0.30).This questionnaire is a comprehensible tool, achieving a thorough assessment of relevant pain dimensions. The MHPQ can help guide treatment recommendations by highlighting relevant topics and contributing to more effective, integrated treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.