ArticleAsian biomedicine : research, reviews and news2020
Thai-version Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire: concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and factors predictive for migraine-related disability.
Article in Asian biomedicine : research, reviews and news, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preventive treatment response associated with migraine aura subtypes in a Thai population.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Importance of quantifying migraine disability in the native language of the migraineur.Asian biomedicine : research, reviews and news · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A Thai-version of the Migraine Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ 2.1) is available, but a qualified questionnaire used specifically for disability assessment was not available. The most relevant practical disability assessment tested during this study was the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire. Objectives: To test the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency of a Thai-version MIDAS questionnaire, and factors to predict disability in people with migraine. Methods: We conducted the present prospective study at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Bangkok. The original English MIDAS Questionnaire was translated into Thai with back-translation into English and the language equivalence was assessed. The Thai-version MIDAS Questionnaire was tested for concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency, and factors including duration of migraine history, migraine characteristics, and comorbidity were assessed for the ability to predict migraine-related disability of migraineurs. Results: Of the 58 participants, 31 were eligible to be included. The validity of the Thai-version questionnaire between the MIDAS total score and the mean headache severity (question B), the mean pain duration per attack, and the mean pain numerical rating scale (NRS) score were moderately correlated with a Spearman correlation coefficient range 0.42-0.58. The test-retest reliability of MIDAS grade had a weighted κ of 0.66, and for individual questions of the MIDAS total score, questions A and B assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients ranged 0.89-0.98. The internal consistency had a Cronbach α of 0.98. The mean pain NRS score in the past 3 months was an independent predictive factor for migraine-related disability. Conclusion: The Thai-version MIDAS Questionnaire has moderate concurrent validity, acceptable internal consistency, and excellent test-retest reliability. It would be helpful to assess clinical outcomes. Future study with a standardized translation process for the Thai-version questionnaire and a larger sample size is warranted to confirm internal consistency and determine all probable predictive factors for migraine-related disability.
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.