The Multiple Sclerosis Self-Management Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Multiple Sclerosis Self-Management Scale (MSSM) is currently the only measure that was developed specifically to address self-management among individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS). While good internal consistency (α = 0.85) and construct validity have been demonstrated, other psychometric properties have not been established. This study was undertaken to evaluate the criterion validity, test-retest reliability, and face validity of the MSSM. METHODS: Thirty-one individuals with MS who met the inclusion criteria were recruited to complete a series of questionnaires at two time points. At Time 1, participants completed the MSSM and two generic self-management tools-the Partners in Health (PIH-12) and the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ)-as well as a short questionnaire to capture participants' opinions about the MSSM. At Time 2, approximately 2 weeks after Time 1, participants completed the MSSM again. RESULTS: The available MSSM factors showed moderate to high correlations with both PIH-12 and heiQ and were deemed to have satisfactory test-retest reliability. Face validity pointed to areas of the MSSM that need to be revised in future work. As indicated by the participants, some dimensions of MS self-management are missing in the MSSM and some items such as medication are redundant. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence for the reliability and validity of the MSSM; however, further changes are required for both researchers and clinicians to use the tool meaningfully in practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".