Measuring the impact of migraine: a systematic review of the measurement properties of MIDAS, HIT-6, and MSQoL.
Shilpa Prasad, Rathnasabapathi Elaiyappan, Venkatesan Hariram et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This systematic review compared the measurement properties of MIDAS, HIT-6, and MSQoL for assessing migraine impact. Following COSMIN methods, it included 22 studies with 20,455 participants. All three instruments had sufficient internal consistency and construct validity. HIT-6 received sufficient ratings across all assessed properties, supported by moderate-to-high-quality evidence. MIDAS had sufficient core properties but limited responsiveness and inconsistent reliability across cultural versions; MSQoL had insufficient test-retest reliability. The authors recommend HIT-6 and MIDAS for measuring migraine impact, while further research is needed for MSQoL.
Key findings
- The review included 22 studies and 20,455 participants.
- HIT-6 showed sufficient ratings across all assessed measurement properties, with moderate-to-high-quality evidence.
- MIDAS had sufficient core properties, but responsiveness was limited and reliability varied across cultural versions.
- MSQoL showed sufficient structural validity and internal consistency but insufficient test-retest reliability.
Why it matters
Migraine impact measures inform assessment of disability and quality of life, but their measurement performance is not interchangeable. This review suggests that HIT-6 has the most consistently supported properties, while MIDAS has specific limitations and MSQoL needs further reliability research. Understanding these differences can help clinicians interpret questionnaire results and select measures suited to the intended assessment.
What to keep in mind
The review was restricted to English-language full-text studies, and the evidence for MSQoL reliability and responsiveness was insufficient.