The psychometric properties of clinical rating scales used in multiple sclerosis

Brain

Volumn 122, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 141-159

  Sharrack, Basil ^a   Hughes, Richard A C ^a   Soudain, Sara ^a   Dunn, Graham ^b  

^a GUY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical rating scales; Multiple sclerosis; Reliability; Responsiveness; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; PHYSICAL DISABILITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; RATING SCALE;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FACTOR ANALYSIS, STATISTICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NERVOUS SYSTEM; OBSERVER VARIATION; PSYCHOMETRICS; WALKING;

EID: 0032905049     PISSN: 00068950     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/brain/122.1.141     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Amato MP, Fratiglioni L, Groppi C, Siracusa G, Amaducci L. Interrater reliability in assessing functional systems and disability on the Kurtzke scale in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1988; 45: 746-8.
2. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-10.
3. British Standards Institution. Precision of test methods I: guide for the determination and reproducibility of standard test methods. BS 5497 Part I. London: British Standards Institution; 1979.
4. Brosseau L, Wolfson C. The inter-rater reliability and construct validity of the Functional Independence Measure for multiple sclerosis subjects. Clin Rehabil 1994; 8: 107-15.
5. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and psychological measurement 1960: 20: 37-46.
6. Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press; 1977.
7. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297-334.
8. Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures: statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 1991; 12 (4 Suppl): 142S-58S.
9. Ellison GW, Myers LW, Leake BD. Responsiveness of the Disability Status Scale (DSS) [abstract]. Neurology 1993; 43 (2 Suppl 1): A204.
10. EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for measurement of health related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199-208.
11. Fleiss JL, Schrout PE. Approximate interval estimation for a certain intraclass correlation coefficient. Psychometrika 1978; 43: 259-62.
12. Francis DA, Bain P, Swan AV, Hughes RA. An assessment of disability rating scales used in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1991; 48: 299-301.
13. Garratt AM. Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK. Russell IT. The SF36 health survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? Br Med J 1993; 306: 1440-4.
14. Goodkin DE, Hertsgaard D, Rudick RA. Exacerbation rates and adherence to disease type in a prospectively followed-up population with multiple sclerosis: implications for clinical trials. Arch Neurol 1989; 46: 1107-12.
15. Goodkin DE, Cookfair D, Wende K, Bourdette D, Pullicino P, Scherokman B, et al. Inter- and intrarater scoring agreement using grades 1.0 to 3.5 of the Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology 1992; 42: 859-63.
16. Granger CV, Cotter AC, Hamilton BB, Fiedler RC, Hens MM. Functional assessment scales: a study of persons with multiple sclerosis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1990; 71: 870-5.
17. Hall KM, Hamilton BB, Gordon WA, Zasler ND. Characteristics and comparisons of functional assessment indices: Disability Rating Scale, Functional Independence Measure, and Functional Assessment Measure. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1993; 8: 60-74.
18. Hamilton BB, Granger CV, Sherwin FS, Zielezny M, Teshman JS. A uniform national data system for medical rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer MJ, editor. Rehabilitation outcomes: analysis and measurements. Baltimore: Brookes; 1987. p. 137-47.
19. Harwood RH, Gompertz P, Ebrahim S. Handicap one year after a stroke: validity of a new scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994; 57: 825-9.
20. Hauser SL, Dawson DM, Lehrich JR, Seal MF, Kevy SV, Propper RD, et al. Intensive immunosuppression in progressive multiple sclerosis: a randomized, three-arm study of high-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide, plasma exchange, and ACTH. N Engl J Med 1983; 308: 173-80.
21. Hobart J, Lamping D, Freeman J, Thompson A. Measuring disability in multiple sclerosis: reliability of the functional independence measure [abstract]. Eur J Neurol 1996a; 3 Suppl 2: 123.
22. Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Freeman JA, Thompson AJ. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Kurtzke expanded disability status scale (EDSS) in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients [abstract]. Eur J Neurol 1996b; 3 Suppl 4: 13.
23. Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Freeman JA, Thompson AJ. The responsiveness of disability measures in multiple sclerosis (MS) [abstract]. Eur J Neurol 1996c; 3 Suppl 4: 13.
24. Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Thompson AJ. Evaluating neurological outcome measures: the bare essentials. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996d; 60: 127-30.
25. Hunt SM, McKenna SP, McEwen J, Williams J, Papp E. The Nottingham Health Profile: subjective health status and medical consultations. Soc Sci Med [A] 1981; 15: 221-9.
26. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989; 27 (3 Suppl): S178-89.
27. Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. In: Eisenberg MG, Grzesiak RC, editors. Advances in clinical rehabilitation, Vol. 1. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1987. p. 6-18.
28. Kidd D, Stewart G, Baldry J, Johnson J, Rossiter D, Petruckevitch A, et al. The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study [see comments]. Disabil Rehabil 1995; 17: 10-4. Comment in: Disabil Rehabil 1995; 17: 456.
29. Kidd D, Stewart G, Baldry J, Johnson J, Rossiter D, Petruckevitch A, et al. The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study [see comments]. Disabil Rehabil 1995; 17: 10-4. Comment in: Disabil Rehabil 1995; 17: 456.
30. Koziol JA, Frutos A, Sipe JC, Romine JS, Beutler E. A comparison of two neurologic scoring instruments for multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 1996; 243: 209-13.
31. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33: 1444-52.
32. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-74.
33. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J 1965; 14: 61-5.
34. Midgard R, Ruse T, Nyland H. Impairment, disability, and handicap in multiple sclerosis: a cross-sectional study in an incident cohort in More and Romsdal County, Norway, J Neurol 1996; 243: 337-44.
35. Mumford CJ, Compston A. Problems with rating scales for multiple sclerosis: a novel approach - the CAMBS score. J Neurol 1993; 240: 209-15.
36. Norman GR, Streiner DL. Principal components and factor analysis. In: Norman GR, Streiner DL. Biostatistics. St. Louis (MO): Mosby; 1993. p. 129-42.
37. Noseworthy JH. Clinical scoring methods for multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1994; 36 Suppl: S80-5.
38. Noseworthy JH, Vandervoort MK, Wong CJ, Ebers GC. Interrater variability with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and Functional Systems (FS) in a multiple sclerosis clinical trial. Neurology 1990; 40: 971-5.
39. Rodriguez M, Siva A, Ward J, Stolp-Smith K, O'Brien P, Kurland L. Impairment, disability, and handicap in multiple sclerosis: a population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Neurology 1994; 44: 28-33.
40. Rothwell PM, McDowell Z, Wong CK, Dorman PJ. Doctors and patients don't agree: cross sectional study of patients' and doctors' perceptions and assessments of disability in multiple sclerosis. Br Med J 1997; 314: 1580-3.
41. Sharrack B, Hughes RA. Clinical scales for multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 1996; 135: 1-9.
42. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979; 86: 420-8.
43. Sipe JC, Knobler RL, Braheny SL, Rice GP, Panitch HS, Oldstone MB. A neurologic rating scale (NRS) for use in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1984; 34: 1368-72.
44. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995.
45. Swingler RJ, Compston DAS. The morbidity of multiple sclerosis. Q J Med 1992; 83: 325-37.
46. Willoughby EW, Paty DW. Scales for rating impairment in multiple sclerosis: a critique. Neurology 1988; 38: 1793-8.