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


METHODS
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.


RESULTS
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.


CONCLUSIONS
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.
Heinemann
Klaas
K
Center for Epidemiology & Health Research Berlin, Invalidenstr, 115, 10115 Berlin, Germany. klaas@zeg-berlin.de
Ruebig
Alexander
A
Potthoff
Peter
P
Schneider
Hermann P G
HP
Strelow
Frank
F
Heinemann
Lothar A J
LA
Do
Minh Thai
MT
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001208:Asia; D001294:Attitude to Health / Q000208:ethnology*; D005060:Europe; D005260:Female; D052776:Female Urogenital Diseases / Q000145:classification / Q000208:ethnology; D006801:Humans; D038622:Internationality; D007843:Latin America; D008593:Menopause / Q000208:ethnology / Q000502:physiology / Q000523:psychology*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009656:North America; D011594:Psychometrics / Q000295:instrumentation*; D011788:Quality of Life / Q000523:psychology*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D018434:Sickness Impact Profile; D013001:Somatoform Disorders / Q000145:classification / Q000208:ethnology; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D016387:Women's Health / Q000208:ethnology