<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>3(9)</volume><submitter>Hilari K</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4> Contrasting accounts exist on whether people with stroke are able to self-report on outcomes using visual analogue scales (VASs). We explored correlations between multi-item scale-rated health-related quality of life (HRQL) and VAS-rated HRQL after stroke, and compared those with versus without aphasia.&lt;h4>Design&lt;/h4>Cross-sectional survey.&lt;h4>Setting&lt;/h4>Community dwelling stroke patients living in London.&lt;h4>Participants&lt;/h4>People with first stroke were recruited during their hospital stay and were assessed 3 months later.&lt;h4>Measures&lt;/h4>The Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test, the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale (SAQOL-39g) and a single vertical VAS.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>73 people took part, 14 with aphasia. VAS scores were significantly correlated with the overall SAQOL-39g (r=0.69, p&lt;0.01). SAQOL-39g subdomain scores were also correlated with VAS scores, with the psychosocial domain most highly correlated (r=0.67, p&lt;0.01) and the communication least correlated (ρ=0.30, p&lt;0.05). SAQOL-39g-VAS difference scores were higher for people with aphasia and the difference was significant (t (71)=2.02, p&lt;0.05).&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Despite the significant correlation of the overall SAQOL-39g and the VAS-rated HRQL, subdomain results suggested that people considered mostly psychosocial aspects when rating their HRQL on a single VAS. Agreement was poorer for people with aphasia, raising issues for the use of VASs with people with aphasia.</pubmed_abstract><journal>BMJ open</journal><pagination>e003309</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC3787490</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Visual analogue scales in stroke: what can they tell us about health-related quality of life?</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC3787490</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Hilari K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Boreham LD</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Visual analogue scales in stroke: what can they tell us about health-related quality of life?</name><description>&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4> Contrasting accounts exist on whether people with stroke are able to self-report on outcomes using visual analogue scales (VASs). We explored correlations between multi-item scale-rated health-related quality of life (HRQL) and VAS-rated HRQL after stroke, and compared those with versus without aphasia.&lt;h4>Design&lt;/h4>Cross-sectional survey.&lt;h4>Setting&lt;/h4>Community dwelling stroke patients living in London.&lt;h4>Participants&lt;/h4>People with first stroke were recruited during their hospital stay and were assessed 3 months later.&lt;h4>Measures&lt;/h4>The Frenchay Aphasia Screening Test, the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale (SAQOL-39g) and a single vertical VAS.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>73 people took part, 14 with aphasia. VAS scores were significantly correlated with the overall SAQOL-39g (r=0.69, p&lt;0.01). SAQOL-39g subdomain scores were also correlated with VAS scores, with the psychosocial domain most highly correlated (r=0.67, p&lt;0.01) and the communication least correlated (ρ=0.30, p&lt;0.05). SAQOL-39g-VAS difference scores were higher for people with aphasia and the difference was significant (t (71)=2.02, p&lt;0.05).&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Despite the significant correlation of the overall SAQOL-39g and the VAS-rated HRQL, subdomain results suggested that people considered mostly psychosocial aspects when rating their HRQL on a single VAS. Agreement was poorer for people with aphasia, raising issues for the use of VASs with people with aphasia.</description><dates><release>2013-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2013 Sep</publication><modification>2025-04-29T11:01:09.401Z</modification><creation>2019-03-27T01:16:44Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC3787490</accession><cross_references><pubmed>24068764</pubmed><doi>10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003309</doi></cross_references></HashMap>