The value of patient-reported outcome measures for multiple sclerosis

Abstract

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

The Lancet Neurology. Patient-reported outcomes in the spotlight. Lancet Neurol 2019; 18: 981.

Strijbis

Repovic

Mostert

, et al. The MSIS-29 and SF-36 as outcomes in secondary progressive MS trials. Mult Scler J 2022; 28: 1606–1619.

Kapoor

Campbell

, et al. Effect of natalizumab on disease progression in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (ASCEND): A phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with an open-label extension. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17: 405–415.

Schwartz

Ayandeh

Motl

. Investigating the minimal important difference in ambulation in multiple sclerosis: A disconnect between performance-based and patient-reported outcomes? J Neurol Sci 2014; 347: 268–274.

Schwartz

. Data mining for response shift patterns in multiple sclerosis patients using recursive partitioning tree analysis. Qual Life Res 2011; 20: 1543–1553.

Rapkin

Schwartz

. Distilling the essence of appraisal: A mixed methods study of people with multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res 2016; 25: 793–805.

King

Dueck

Revicki

. Can methods developed for interpreting group-level patient-reported outcome data be applied to individual patient management? Med Care 2019; 57 Suppl 5(Suppl 1): S38–S45.

Kozlowski

Cella

Nitsch

, et al. Evaluating individual change with the Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QoL) short forms. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016; 97: 650–654.e8.

Gil-González

Martín-Rodríguez

Conrad

, et al. Quality of life in adults with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review. BMJ Open; 10: e041249.