Literature DB >> 6827316

Agreement between physicians on assessment of outcome following severe head injury.

A I Maas, R Braakman, H J Schouten, J M Minderhoud, A H van Zomeren.   

Abstract

This study describes inter-observer agreement between physicians and consistency of one observer on repeated scoring in the assessment of outcome 6 to 12 months after severe head injury. Observer agreement is expressed by Kappa, taking chance agreement into account. The study was conducted in "live" and "non-live" situations, using five- and eight-category outcome scales. Kappa values were considerably higher when the five-category scale was used. However, even with the five-category scale, disagreement was considerable, and the results indicate that accurate predictions of the quality of survival will be difficult to attain. Observer agreement should be taken into account in prognosis studies, and when different therapeutic regimens are evaluated on the basis of outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6827316     DOI: 10.3171/jns.1983.58.3.0321

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  24 in total

1.  Does the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale add value to the conventional Glasgow Outcome Scale?

Authors:  James Weir; Ewout W Steyerberg; Isabella Butcher; Juan Lu; Hester F Lingsma; Gillian S McHugh; Bob Roozenbeek; Andrew I R Maas; Gordon D Murray
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 5.269

2.  Lessons from traumatic head injury for assessing functional status after brain tumour.

Authors:  J T Lindsay Wilson
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2012-02-11       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  A method for reducing misclassification in the extended Glasgow Outcome Score.

Authors:  Juan Lu; Anthony Marmarou; Kate Lapane; Elizabeth Turf; Lindsay Wilson
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 5.269

4.  Impact of GOS misclassification on ordinal outcome analysis of traumatic brain injury clinical trials.

Authors:  Juan Lu; Anthony Marmarou; Kate L Lapane
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 5.269

5.  Assessment of responsiveness in acute cerebral disorders. A multicentre study on the reaction level scale (RLS 85).

Authors:  D Stålhammar; J E Starmark; E Holmgren; N Eriksson; C H Nordström; O Fedders; B Rosander
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 2.216

6.  Glasgow Outcome Scale Measures and Impact on Analysis and Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

Authors:  Jose-Miguel Yamal; H Julia Hannay; Shankar Gopinath; Imoigele P Aisiku; Julia S Benoit; Claudia S Robertson
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2019-05-23       Impact factor: 5.269

7.  Validating Multidimensional Outcome Assessment Using the TBI Common Data Elements: An Analysis of the TRACK-TBI Pilot Sample.

Authors:  Lindsay D Nelson; Jana Ranson; Adam R Ferguson; Joseph Giacino; David O Okonkwo; Alex Valadka; Geoffrey Manley; Michael McCrea
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 5.269

8.  Endothelin-1 and endothelin receptor gene variants and their association with negative outcomes following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Authors:  Matthew Gallek; Sheila Alexander; Elizabeth Crago; Paula Sherwood; Michael Horowitz; Samuel Poloyac; Yvette Conley
Journal:  Biol Res Nurs       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 2.522

9.  A comparative study of the Reaction Level Scale (RLS85) with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Edinburgh-2 Coma Scale (modified) (E2CS(M)).

Authors:  J Tesseris; N Pantazidis; C Routsi; D Fragoulakis
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 2.216

10.  Effects of Glasgow Outcome Scale misclassification on traumatic brain injury clinical trials.

Authors:  Juan Lu; Gordon D Murray; Ewout W Steyerberg; Isabella Butcher; Gillian S McHugh; Hester Lingsma; Nino Mushkudiani; Sung Choi; Andrew I R Maas; Anthony Marmarou
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 5.269

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.