The Menopause Rating Scale (MRS) scale: a methodological review

Klaas Heinemann, Alexander Ruebig, Peter Potthoff, Hermann P G Schneider, Frank Strelow, Lothar A J Heinemann, Minh Thai Do, Klaas Heinemann, Alexander Ruebig, Peter Potthoff, Hermann P G Schneider, Frank Strelow, Lothar A J Heinemann, Minh Thai Do

Abstract

Background: This paper compiles data from different sources to get a first comprehensive picture of psychometric and other methodological characteristics of the Menopause Rating Scale (MRS) scale. The scale was designed and standardized as a self-administered scale to (a) to assess symptoms/complaints of aging women under different conditions, (b) to evaluate the severity of symptoms over time, and (c) to measure changes pre- and postmenopause replacement therapy. The scale became widespread used (available in 10 languages).

Method: A large multinational survey (9 countries in 4 continents) from 2001/ 2002 is the basis for in depth analyses on reliability and validity of the MRS. Additional small convenience samples were used to get first impressions about test-retest reliability. The data were centrally analyzed. Data from a postmarketing HRT study were used to estimate discriminative validity.

Results: Reliability measures (consistency and test-retest stability) were found to be good across countries, although the sample size for test-retest reliability was small.

Validity: The internal structure of the MRS across countries was astonishingly similar to conclude that the scale really measures the same phenomenon in symptomatic women. The sub-scores and total score correlations were high (0.7-0.9) but lower among the sub-scales (0.5-0.7). This however suggests that the subscales are not fully independent. Norm values from different populations were presented showing that a direct comparison between Europe and North America is possible, but caution recommended with comparisons of data from Latin America and Indonesia. But this will not affect intra-individual comparisons within clinical trials. The comparison with the Kupperman Index showed sufficiently good correlations, illustrating an adept criterion-oriented validity. The same is true for the comparison with the generic quality-of-life scale SF-36 where also a sufficiently close association has been shown.

Conclusion: The currently available methodological evidence points towards a high quality of the MRS scale to measure and to compare HRQoL of aging women in different regions and over time, it suggests a high reliability and high validity as far as the process of construct validation could be completed yet.

References

    1. Hauser GA, Huber IC, Keller PJ, Lauritzen C, Schneider HPG. Evaluation der klinischen Beschwerden (Menopause Rating Scale) Zentralbl Gynakol. 1994;116:16–23.
    1. Potthoff P, Heinemann LAJ, Schneider HPG, Rosemeier HP, Hauser GA. Menopause-Rating Skala (MRS): Methodische Standardisierung in der deutschen Bevölkerung. Zentralbl Gynakol. 2000;122:280–286.
    1. Heinemann K, Assmann A, Möhner S, Schneider HPG, Heinemann LAJ. Reliabilität der Menopause-Rating-Skala (MRS). Untersuchung für die Deutsche Bevölkerung. Zentralbl Gynakol. 2002;124:161–163. doi: 10.1055/s-2002-32268.
    1. Schneider HPG, Heinemann LAJ, Rosemeier HP, Potthoff P, Behre HM. The Menopause Rating Scale (MRS): Reliability of scores of menopausal complaints. Climacteric. 2000;3:59–64.
    1. Schneider HPG, Heinemann LAJ, Rosemeier HP, Potthoff P, Behre HM. The Menopause Rating Scale (MRS): Comparison with Kupperman Index and Quality of Life Scale SF-36. Climacteric. 2000;3:50–58.
    1. Schneider HPG, Rosemeier HP, Schnitker J, Gerbsch S, Turck R. Application and factor analysis of the menopause rating scale [MRS] in a post-marketing surveillance study of Climen®. Maturitas. 2000;37:113–124. doi: 10.1016/S0378-5122(00)00177-8.
    1. Schneider HPG, Heinemann LAJ, Thiele K. The Menopause Rating Scale (MRS): Cultural and linguistic translation into English. Life and Medical Science Online. 2002;3:DOI:101072/LO0305326.
    1. Heinemann LAJ, Potthoff P, Schneider HPG. International versions of the Menopause Rating Scale (MRS) Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:28. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-28.
    1. Anonymous Trust introduces new translation criteria. Medical Outcomes Trust Bulletin. 1997;5:2–4.
    1. Acquadro C, Jambon B, Ellis D, Marquis P. Languages and translation issues. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of Life and Pharmaco-Econonomics in Clinical Trials. 2. 1996. pp. 575–585.
    1. Schneider HPG, Behre HM. Contemporary evaluation of climacteric complaints: Its impact on quality of life. In: Schneider HPG, editor. Hormone replacement therapy and quality of life. The Parthenon Publishing Group. Boca Raton, London, New York, Washington; 2002. pp. 45–61.
    1. Greene JG. Measuring the symptom dimension of quality of life: General and menopause-specific scales and their subscale structure. In: Schneider HPG, editor. Hormone replacement therapy and quality of life. The Parthenon Publishing Group. Boca Raton, London, New York, Washington; 2002. pp. 35–43.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren