ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2020
Cross-sectional validity and specificity of comprehensive measurement in lymphedema and lipedema of the lower extremity: a comparison of five outcome instruments.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Central Sensitization, Pain, and Psychosocial Factors in Individuals with Lipedema: A Cross-Sectional Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Assessment of the elasticity of lipedematous tissue and the examination of the relationship between pain and fibrosis in lipedema.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026Observational
- Objective measures of physical activity and physical capacities in lipedema - a scooping review.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Lipedema Reduction Surgery Outcomes and Comorbidities: A Retrospective Study.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Development of an Evidence-Based and Theory-Informed Self-Management Intervention for People with Lipoedema: An Intervention Mapping Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Objective Assessment of the Cardiorespiratory Fitness Among Individuals With Lymphedema and Lipedema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of vascular medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Health Implications of Lipedema: Analysis of Patient Questionnaires and Population-Based Matched Controls.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Relationship between subjectively-rated and objectively-tested physical function across six different medical diagnoses.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2023Article
- Lipedema Reduction Surgery Improves Pain, Mobility, Physical Function, and Quality of Life: Case Series Report.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Functioning of People with Lipoedema According to All Domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Women with lipoedema: a national survey on their health, health-related quality of life, and sense of coherence.BMC women's health · 2022Article
- Indications of Peripheral Pain, Dermal Hypersensitivity, and Neurogenic Inflammation in Patients with Lipedema.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- A Scoping Review of Available Tools in Measurement of the Effectiveness of Conservative Treatment in Lipoedema.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Standard of care for lipedema in the United States.Phlebology · 2021Article
- Common and Contrasting Characteristics of the Chronic Soft-Tissue Pain Conditions Fibromyalgia and Lipedema.Journal of pain research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiterature on the validity of outcome measurement in lymphedema and lipedema is very sparse. This study aimed to examine the convergent, divergent and discriminant validity of a set of 5 instruments in both conditions.
methodsCross-sectional outcome was measured by the generic Short Form 36 (SF-36), the lymphedema-specific Freiburg Quality of Life Assessment for lymphatic disorders, Short Version (FLQA-lk), the knee-specific Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADL), the Symptom Checklist-90-revised (SCL-90R), and the Six-Minute Walk Test (6 MWT). Construct convergent/divergent validity was quantified by bivariate correlations and multivariate factor analysis, and discriminant validity by standardized mean differences (SMDs).
resultsHealth was consistently better in lymphedema (n = 107) than in lipedema (n = 96). The highest construct convergence was found for physical health between the SF-36 and KOS-ADL (bivariate correlations up to 0.78, factor loads up to 0.85, explained variance up to 56.8%). The second most important factor was mental health (bivariate correlations up to 0.79, factor loads up to 0.86, explained variance up to 13.3%). Discriminant validity was greatest for the FLQA-lk Physical complaints (adjusted SMD = 0.93) followed by the SF-36 Bodily pain (adjusted SMD = 0.83), KOS-ADL Function (adjusted SMD = 0.47) and SF-36 Vitality (adjusted SMD = 0.39).
conclusionsAll five instruments have specific strengths and can be implemented according to the scope and aim of the outcome examination. A minimum measurement set should comprise: the SF-36 Bodily pain, SF-36 Vitality, FLQA-lk Physical complaints, FLQA-lk Social life, FLQA-lk Emotional well-being, FLQA-lk Health state, KOS-ADL Symptoms, KOS-ADL Function, and the SCL-90R Interpersonal sensitivity.
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.