Validation of the motion sickness severity scale: Secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of a treatment for motion sickness
Abstract
Background Motion sickness is characterized by nausea and vomiting among a constellation of symptoms. Symptom severity is dynamic and distressing. Most validated motion sickness scales are time-intensive and effortful, with alternative scales having uncertain performance or non-specific measures. A validated instrument allowing for facile, rapid assessment of core motion sickness symptom severity would therefore be valuable. We assessed the performance of the Motion Sickness Severity Scale (MSSS), a six-item questionnaire designed to measure real-time motion sickness symptoms. Methods MSSS construct validity was assessed as a secondary analysis of data from 63 healthy participants without antiemetic treatment in a clinical trial (Unique Identifier = NCT03772340) conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Tradipitant—a novel neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist—in the treatment of motion sickness. Clinical outcome assessments included the MSSS, the Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S), and the Motion Sickness Assessment Questionnaire (MSAQ). The performance of the MSSS through Pearson correlation coefficients, within-group analysis of variance, empirical cumulative distribution functions, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. Results The MSSS correlated very highly with the PGI-S (r = 0.93, p-value<0.0001) and highly with the MSAQ (r = 0.83, p-value<0.0001). Mean MSSS scores between increasing PGI-S severity levels increased significantly in all four increments…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 63 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.