Menorrhagia Impact Questionnaire: assessing the influence of heavy menstrual bleeding on quality of life

References

• NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Management of menorrhagia. Effective Health Care 1995;1:1-15
   Google Scholar
• Lethaby A, Farquhar C. Treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding. BMJ 2003;327:1243-44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapley M, Jordan K, Croft, PR. An epidemiological survey of symptoms of menstrual loss in the community. Br J Gen Pract 2004;54:359-63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickey M, Higham JM, Fraser I. Progestogens versus oestrogens and progestogens for irregular uterine bleeding associated with anovulation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;4:CD001895
   Google Scholar
• Apgar BS, Kaufman AH, George-Nwogu U, et al. Treatment of menorrhagia. Am Fam Physician 2007;75:1813-19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haynes PJ, Hodgson H, Anderson AB, et al. Measurement of menstrual blood loss in patients complaining of menorrhagia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1977;84:763-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Warner PE, Critchley HOD, Lumsden HA, et al. Menorrhagia II: is the 80 mL blood loss criterion useful in management of complaint of menorrhagia? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;190:1224-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health: Heavy menstrual bleeding. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. London, England, 2007. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG44/guidance/pdf/English [Last accessed on July 15, 2010]
   Google Scholar
• Duckitt K, Collins S. BMJ Clinical Evidence. Menorrhagia. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd., London, England, 2006. Available at: http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/ceweb/conditions/woh/0805/0805.jsp [Last accessed on July 15, 2010]
   Google Scholar
• Shankar M, Chi C, Kadir RA. Review of quality of life: menorrhagia in women with or without inherited bleeding disorders. Haemophilia 2008;14:15-20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habiba M, Julian S, Taub N, et al. Limited role of multi-attribute utility scale and SF-36 in predicting management outcome of heavy menstrual bleeding. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;148:81-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matteson KA, Clark MA. Questioning our questions: do frequently asked questions adequately cover the aspects of women's lives most affected by abnormal uterine bleeding? Opinions of women with abnormal uterine bleeding participating in focus group discussions. Women Health 2010;50:195-211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkinson C, Peto V, Coulter A. Making sense of ambiguity: evaluation in internal reliability and face validity of the SF 36 questionnaire in women presenting with menorrhagia. Qual Health Care 1996;5:9-12
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moos RH. The Development of a Menstrual Distress Questionnaire. Psych Med 1968;30:853-867
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruta DA, Garratt AM, Chadha YC, et al. Assessment of patients with menorrhagia: how valid is a structured clinical history as a measure of health status? Qual Life Res 1995;4:33-40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw RW, Brickley MR, Evans L, et al. Perceptions of women on the impact of menorrhagia on their health using multi-attribute utility assessment. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:1155-9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lamping DL, Rowe P, Clarke A, et al. Development and validation of the menorrhagia outcomes questionnaire. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:766-79
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shapley M, Jordan K, Croft PR. Abnormal bleeding patterns associated with menorrhagia in women in the community and in women presenting to primary care. Fam Pract 2007;24:532-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santer M, Wyke S, Warner P. What aspects of periods are most bothersome for women reporting heavy menstrual bleeding? Community survey and qualitative study. BMC Womens Health 2007;7:8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Winkler UH. The effect of tranexamic acid on the quality of life of women with heavy menstrual bleeding. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001;99:238-43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Heavy menstrual bleeding. London, England: NICE Clinical Guideline CG44; 2007. Available at: www.nice.org.uk/CG044 [Last accessed on July 15, 2010]
   Google Scholar
• Lukes AS, Moore KA, Muse KN, et al. Tranexamic acid treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:865-75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US Dept. of Health and Human Services. FDA Guidance for Industry: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Silver Spring, MD, December 2009; Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf [Last accessed on July 15, 2010]
   Google Scholar
• Patrick DL, Burke LB, Powers JH, et al. Patient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective. Value Health 2007;10(Suppl 2):S125-37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware J, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473-83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193-205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guttman L. A basis for analyzing test-retest reliability. Psychometrika 1945;10:255-82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen JJ. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988:8
   Google Scholar
• Lysteda [package insert]. Newport, KY: Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 2009
   Google Scholar
• Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:407-15
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, et al. for the Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77:371-83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patrick DL, Gagnon DD, Zagari MJ, et al. for the Epoetin Alfa Study Group. Assessing the clinical significance of health-related quality of life (HrQOL) improvements in anaemic cancer patients receiving epoetin alfa. Eur J Cancer 2003;39:335-45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar