Literature DB >> 27796917

The Spectrum of Functional Rating Scales in Neurology Clinical Trials.

Pushpa Narayanaswami1.   

Abstract

The selection of an appropriate outcome measure is crucial to the success of a clinical trial, in order to obtain accurate results, which, in turn, influence patient care and future research. Outcomes that can be directly measured are mortality/survival. More frequently, neurology clinical trials evaluate outcomes that cannot be directly measured, such as disability, cognitive function, or change in symptoms of the condition under study. These complex outcomes are abstract ideas or latent constructs and are measured using rating scales. Functional rating scales typically assess the ability of patients to perform tasks and roles for everyday life. Rating scales should be valid (measure what they are supposed to measure), reliable (provide similar results if administered under the same conditions), and responsive (able to detect clinically important changes over time). The clinical relevance of rating scales depends on their ability to detect a minimal clinically important difference, and should be distinguished from statistical significance. Most rating scales are ordinal scales and have limitations. Modern psychometric methods of Rasch analysis and item response theory, termed latent trait theory, are increasingly being utilized to convert ordinal data to interval measurements, both to validate existing scales and to develop new scales. Patient-reported outcomes are being increasingly used in clinical trials and have a role in clinical quality assessment. The PROMIS and NeuroQoL databases are excellent resources for rigorously developed and validated patient-reported outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Functional rating scales; Rasch analysis; classical test theory; clinimetrics; item response theory; outcome measures

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27796917      PMCID: PMC5233630          DOI: 10.1007/s13311-016-0488-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurotherapeutics        ISSN: 1878-7479            Impact factor:   7.620


  63 in total

1.  On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation.

Authors:  C B Terwee; F W Dekker; W M Wiersinga; M F Prummel; P M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Commentary--goodbye M(C)ID! Hello MID, where do you come from?

Authors:  Holger J Schünemann; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 3.  Measurement properties and interpretability of the Chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (CRQ).

Authors:  Holger J Schünemann; Milo Puhan; Roger Goldstein; Roman Jaeschke; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  COPD       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.409

4.  Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval.

Authors:  B D Wright; J M Linacre
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 3.966

Review 5.  Interpretation of quality of life changes.

Authors:  E Lydick; R S Epstein
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Parkinsonism: onset, progression and mortality.

Authors:  M M Hoehn; M D Yahr
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1967-05       Impact factor: 9.910

7.  Developing a valid patient-reported outcome measure.

Authors:  N E Rothrock; K A Kaiser; D Cella
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 8.  Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; David Osoba; Albert W Wu; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Geoffrey R Norman
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.616

9.  How responsive is the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29)? A comparison with some other self report scales.

Authors:  J C Hobart; A Riazi; D L Lamping; R Fitzpatrick; A J Thompson
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 10.154

Review 10.  Proposed preliminary core set measures for disease outcome assessment in adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies.

Authors:  F W Miller; L G Rider; Y L Chung; R Cooper; K Danko; V Farewell; I Lundberg; C Morrison; L Oakley; I Oakley; C Pilkington; J Vencovsky; K Vincent; D L Scott; D A Isenberg
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 7.580

View more
  2 in total

1.  An Appraisal of Novel Biomarkers for Evaluating and Monitoring Neurologic Diseases: Editorial Introduction.

Authors:  Jeremy M Shefner; Marwan N Sabbagh
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 7.620

Review 2.  Clinical outcome measures in dementia with Lewy bodies trials: critique and recommendations.

Authors:  Federico Rodriguez-Porcel; Kathryn A Wyman-Chick; Carla Abdelnour Ruiz; Jon B Toledo; Daniel Ferreira; Prabitha Urwyler; Rimona S Weil; Joseph Kane; Andrea Pilotto; Arvid Rongve; Bradley Boeve; John-Paul Taylor; Ian McKeith; Dag Aarsland; Simon J G Lewis
Journal:  Transl Neurodegener       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 9.883

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.