Literature DB >> 27738359

Rater Training for a Multi-Site, International Clinical Trial: What Mood Symptoms may be most Difficult to Rate?

Martha Sajatovic1, Richa Gaur1, Curtis Tatsuoka1, Susan De Santi1, Nathan Lee1, Judith Laredo1, Sulabh Tripathi1.   

Abstract

AIMS: Given resource constraints in conducting clinical trials, it is critical that rater training focuses on scale items wherein standardization is most challenging. This analysis examined mood disorder symptom ratings submitted in an online rater training program conducted preparatory to the initiation of a multi-site, international mood disorder treatment trial. Ratings were entered online and analyzed for consistency and variability, and compared to established standards (Gold Consensus Ratings/ GCRs).
METHODS: Raters participated in web-based rater training on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Montgomery Asberg Rating Scale (MADRS), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Training included integration of didactic materials and videos of two bipolar depressed patients interviewed by two U.S. clinicians. Raters viewed the videos and rated the mood scales. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using Kappa statistics. Ratings between the raters and the GCRs for individual scale items were assessed using McNemar test for paired binomial proportions.
RESULTS: 194 raters from 16 countries, 80 sites and speaking 20 different languages participated. Interrater agreement on videos ratings ranged from substantial to moderate (HAM-D, Kappa video A = 0.72, video B = 0.65, p < 0.001), (MADRS, Kappa = 0.65 and 0.47, p < 0.001), (YMRS, Kappa = 0.75, and 0.64, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference on agreement based upon on English proficiency, clinical experience, or by country. Scale items that differed from the GCR on the HAM-D were depressed mood, delayed insomnia, retardation, and anxiety (psychic). Items that differed on the MADRS were apparent sadness, inner tension, concentration difficulties, lassitude and inability to feel. Items that differed on the YMRS were irritability and disruptive behavior.
CONCLUSIONS: Identification of specific rating scale items in which rater variability is greatest may facilitate training approaches that target these areas for more efficient training in international clinical trials.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bipolar disorder; clinical trials; depression; rating scales

Year:  2011        PMID: 27738359      PMCID: PMC5044548     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychopharmacol Bull        ISSN: 0048-5764


  21 in total

1.  Development of a standardized training program for the Hamilton Depression Scale using internet-based technologies: results from a pilot study.

Authors:  Kenneth A Kobak; Joshua D Lipsitz; Alan Feiger
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2003 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.791

2.  Enriched rater training using Internet based technologies: a comparison to traditional rater training in a multi-site depression trial.

Authors:  Kenneth A Kobak; Nina Engelhardt; Joshua D Lipsitz
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2005-09-28       Impact factor: 4.791

Review 3.  Evolving concepts in the measurement of treatment effects.

Authors:  Nancy Kline Leidy
Journal:  Proc Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2006-05

4.  A novel approach to rater training and certification in multinational trials.

Authors:  Elizabeth Jeglic; Kenneth A Kobak; Nina Engelhardt; Janet B W Williams; Joshua D Lipsitz; Donna Salvucci; Heather Bryson; Kevin Bellew
Journal:  Int Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.659

5.  Ethical and scientific implications of the globalization of clinical research.

Authors:  Seth W Glickman; John G McHutchison; Eric D Peterson; Charles B Cairns; Robert A Harrington; Robert M Califf; Kevin A Schulman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-02-19       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Rebuilding the R&D engine in big pharma.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Garnier
Journal:  Harv Bus Rev       Date:  2008-05

7.  Culture and assessment of manic symptoms.

Authors:  Paul Mackin; Steven D Targum; Amir Kalali; Dror Rom; Allan H Young
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 9.319

8.  A rating scale for mania: reliability, validity and sensitivity.

Authors:  R C Young; J T Biggs; V E Ziegler; D A Meyer
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 9.319

9.  Web-based training and interrater reliability testing for scoring the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.

Authors:  Jules Rosen; Benoit H Mulsant; Patricia Marino; Christopher Groening; Robert C Young; Debra Fox
Journal:  Psychiatry Res       Date:  2008-08-30       Impact factor: 3.222

10.  The Rater Applied Performance Scale: development and reliability.

Authors:  Joshua Lipsitz; Ken Kobak; Alan Feiger; Dawn Sikich; Georges Moroz; Ama Engelhard
Journal:  Psychiatry Res       Date:  2004-06-30       Impact factor: 3.222

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Training: Challenges, Solutions, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Mark G A Opler; Christian Yavorsky; David G Daniel
Journal:  Innov Clin Neurosci       Date:  2017-12-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.