IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0037504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of the Fibromyalgia Survey Questionnaire within a Cross-Sectional Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Winfried Häuser
  • Eva Jung
  • Brigitte Erbslöh-Möller
  • Mechthild Gesmann
  • Hedi Kühn-Becker
  • Franz Petermann
  • Jost Langhorst
  • Thomas Weiss
  • Andreas Winkelmann
  • Frederick Wolfe

Abstract

The Fibromyalgia Survey Questionnaire (FSQ) assesses the key symptoms of fibromyalgia syndrome. The FSQ can be administrated in survey research and settings where the use of interviews to evaluate the number of pain sites and extent of somatic symptom intensity and tender point examination would be difficult. We validated the FSQ in a cross-sectional survey with FMS patients. In a cross-sectional survey, participants with physician diagnosis of FMS were recruited by FMS-self help organisations and nine clinical institutions of different levels of care. Participants answered the FSQ (composed by the Widespread Pain Index [WPI] and the Somatic Severity Score [SSS]) assessing the Fibromyalgia Survey Diagnostic Criteria (FSDC) and the Patient Health Questionnaire PHQ 4. American College of Rheumatology 1990 classification criteria were assessed in a subgroup of participants. 1,651 persons diagnosed with FMS were included into analysis. The acceptance of the FSQ-items ranged between 78.9 to 98.1% completed items. The internal consistency of the items of the SSS ranged between 0.75–0.82. 85.5% of the study participants met the FSDC. The concordance rate of the FSDC and ACR 1990 criteria was 72.7% in a subsample of 128 patients. The Pearson correlation of the SSS with the PHQ 4 depression score was 0.52 (p

Suggested Citation

  • Winfried Häuser & Eva Jung & Brigitte Erbslöh-Möller & Mechthild Gesmann & Hedi Kühn-Becker & Franz Petermann & Jost Langhorst & Thomas Weiss & Andreas Winkelmann & Frederick Wolfe, 2012. "Validation of the Fibromyalgia Survey Questionnaire within a Cross-Sectional Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-6, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0037504
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037504
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037504&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0037504?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0037504. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.