CONTEXT: The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) is quickly becoming a criterion standard in multicenter clinical trials in Alzheimer disease. An abbreviated version, with formal monitoring for consistency across sites and raters, is currently used in the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS). OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the degree of agreement on CDR scoring of clinical monitors working independently from ADCS-CDR worksheets. DESIGN: Three members of the ADCS who are experienced and highly trained with respect to the CDR independently reviewed the ADCS-CDR worksheets of 15 subjects, assigning box and global CDR scores according to the prescribed algorithm. SETTING: The ratings were assigned during a single, 3-hour session in a closed room. PARTICIPANTS: Two clinical monitors and one project director/clinical monitor supervisor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percent agreement, Kendall's tau-b, and Cohen's kappa were used to assess the degree of agreement of the raters with the previously established gold standard assessment on global and box scores for the 15 subjects. RESULTS: Raters, blinded to patient groupings, were in agreement with the Gold Standard global CDR assessment on 87% of ratings. Kappa values indicated good (kappa = 0.66, orientation and judgment & problem solving boxes) to excellent (kappa = 0.83, global CDR) agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The ADCS-CDR worksheets were reliably and consistently scored by clinical monitors, who may be considered proxy gold standards for CDR assessment.
CONTEXT: The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) is quickly becoming a criterion standard in multicenter clinical trials in Alzheimer disease. An abbreviated version, with formal monitoring for consistency across sites and raters, is currently used in the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS). OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the degree of agreement on CDR scoring of clinical monitors working independently from ADCS-CDR worksheets. DESIGN: Three members of the ADCS who are experienced and highly trained with respect to the CDR independently reviewed the ADCS-CDR worksheets of 15 subjects, assigning box and global CDR scores according to the prescribed algorithm. SETTING: The ratings were assigned during a single, 3-hour session in a closed room. PARTICIPANTS: Two clinical monitors and one project director/clinical monitor supervisor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percent agreement, Kendall's tau-b, and Cohen's kappa were used to assess the degree of agreement of the raters with the previously established gold standard assessment on global and box scores for the 15 subjects. RESULTS: Raters, blinded to patient groupings, were in agreement with the Gold Standard global CDR assessment on 87% of ratings. Kappa values indicated good (kappa = 0.66, orientation and judgment & problem solving boxes) to excellent (kappa = 0.83, global CDR) agreement. CONCLUSIONS: The ADCS-CDR worksheets were reliably and consistently scored by clinical monitors, who may be considered proxy gold standards for CDR assessment.
Authors: M Sano; C Ernesto; R G Thomas; M R Klauber; K Schafer; M Grundman; P Woodbury; J Growdon; C W Cotman; E Pfeiffer; L S Schneider; L J Thal Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1997-04-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J C Morris; A Heyman; R C Mohs; J P Hughes; G van Belle; G Fillenbaum; E D Mellits; C Clark Journal: Neurology Date: 1989-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: L J Thal; A Carta; W R Clarke; S H Ferris; R P Friedland; R C Petersen; J W Pettegrew; E Pfeiffer; M A Raskind; M Sano; M H Tuszynski; R F Woolson Journal: Neurology Date: 1996-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Ranjan Duara; David A Loewenstein; Maria T Greig-Custo; Ashok Raj; Warren Barker; Elizabeth Potter; Elizabeth Schofield; Brent Small; John Schinka; Yougui Wu; Huntington Potter Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: Vanja C Douglas; John Neuhaus; Julene K Johnson; Caroline A Racine; Bruce L Miller; Scott Andrew Josephson Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2011 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: David R Weir; Robert B Wallace; Kenneth M Langa; Brenda L Plassman; Robert S Wilson; David A Bennett; Ranjan Duara; David Loewenstein; Mary Ganguli; Mary Sano Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Linda L Chao; Shannon T Buckley; John Kornak; Norbert Schuff; Catherine Madison; Kristine Yaffe; Bruce L Miller; Joel H Kramer; Michael W Weiner Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2010 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Ranjan Duara; David A Loewenstein; Maria Greig; Amarilis Acevedo; Elizabeth Potter; Jason Appel; Ashok Raj; John Schinka; Elizabeth Schofield; Warren Barker; Yougui Wu; Huntington Potter Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: L L Chao; S G Mueller; S T Buckley; K Peek; S Raptentsetseng; J Elman; K Yaffe; B L Miller; J H Kramer; C Madison; D Mungas; N Schuff; M W Weiner Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2008-06-11 Impact factor: 4.673