Longitudinal metric properties of disability rating scales for Parkinson's disease

Value in Health

Volumn 9, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 386-393

  Martinez Martin, Pablo ^a   Prieto, Luis ^b   Forjaz, Maria João ^a  

^a CARLOS III INSTITUTE OF HEALTH   (Spain)

^b Health Outcomes Department   (Spain)

Author keywords

Hoehn and Yahr Scale; ISAPD; Longitudinal metric properties; Parkinson's disease; Schwab and England Scale; UPDRS

Indexed keywords

ADL DISABILITY; AGED; ARTICLE; DISEASE COURSE; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MAGNITUDE ESTIMATION METHOD; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MEDICAL EXAMINATION; METRIC SYSTEM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PARKINSON DISEASE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

EID: 33749429956     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00131.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Fahn S, Elton RL. Members of the UPDRS Development Committee. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. In: Fahn S, Marsden CD, Calne DB, Goldstein M, eds. Recent Developments in Parkinson's Disease. Florham Park, NJ: Macmillan Health Care Information, 1987.
2. Movement Disorder Society Task Force on Rating Scales for Parkinson's Disease. The Unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (UPDRS): status and recommendations. Mov Disord 2003;18:738-50.
3. Martinez-Martin P. Parámetros evolutivos en la Enfermedad de Parkinson. Doctoral Thesis. Madrid: Universidad Complutense, 1988.
4. Martinez-Martin P, Gil-Nagel A, Morlán Gracia L, et al. Intermediate Scale for Assessment of Parkinson's Disease. Characteristics and structure. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 1995;1:97-102.
5. Rabey JM, Baas H, Bonuccelli U, et al. Evaluation of the Short Parkinson's Evaluation Scale: a new friendly scale for the evaluation of Parkinson's disease in clinical trials. Clin Neuropharmacol 1997;20:322-37.
6. Marinus J, Visser M, Stiggelbout AM, et al. A short scale for the assessment of motor impairments and disabilities in Parkinson's disease: the SPES/SCOPA. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004;75:388-95.
7. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL. Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther 1996;76:1109-23.
8. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, et al. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:459-68.
9. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, et al. A taxonomy for responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:1204-17.
10. Norquist JM, Fitzpatrick R, Dawson J, et al. Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs. raw scores in measuring change in health. Med Care 2004;42(Suppl. 1):25-36.
11. Stratford PW, Riddle DL. Assessing sensitivity to change: choosing the appropriate change coefficient. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2005;3:23.
12. Wyrwich K, Nienaber NA, Tierney WM, et al. Linking clinical relevance and statistical significance in evaluating intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. Med Care 1999;37:469-78.
13. Ferguson RJ, Robinson AB, Splaine M. Use of the reliable change index to evaluate clinical significance in SF-36 outcomes. Qual Life Res 2002;11:509-16.
14. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:395-407.
15. Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, et al. On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res 2003;12:349-62.
16. Wyrwich KW, Bullinger M, Aaronson N, et al. Estimating clinically significant differences in quality of life outcomes. Qual Life Res 2005;14:285-95.
17. Hughes AJ, Daniel SE, Kilford L, et al. Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson's disease - a clinico-pathological study of 100 cases. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992;55:181-4.
18. Hoehn MM, Yahr MD. Parkinsonism: onset, progression, and mortality. Neurology 1967;17:427-42.
19. Goetz CG, Poewe W, Rascol O, et al. Movement Disorder Society Task Force Report on the Hoehn and Yahr Staging Scale: status and recommendations. Mov Disord 2004;19:1020-8.
20. Schwab RS, England AC. Projection technique for evaluating surgery in Parkinson's disease. In: Gillingham FJ, Donaldson IML, eds. Third Symposium on Parkinson's Disease. Edinburgh: E and S Livingstone, 1969.
21. McRae C, Diem G, Vo A, et al. Schwab & England: standardization of administration. Mov Disord 2000;15:335-6.
22. Martinez-Martin P, Gil-Nagel A, Morlán Gracia L, et al. Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale characteristics and structure. Mov Disord 1994;9:76-83.
23. Van Hilten JJ, Van der Zwan AD, Zwinderman AH, et al. Rating impairment and disability in Parkinson's disease: evaluation of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. Mov Disord 1994;9:84-8.
24. Richards M, Marder K, Cote L, et al. Interrater reliability of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale motor examination. Mov Disord 1994;9:89-91.
25. Stebbins GT, Goetz CG. Factor structure of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale: motor examination section. Mov Disord 1998;13:633-6.
26. Louis ED, Lynch T, Marder K, et al. Reliability of patient completion of the historical section of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. Mov Disord 1996;11:185-92.
27. Martinez-Martin P, Benito-León J, Alonso F, et al. Patients', doctors' and caregivers' assessment of disability using the UPDRS-ADL section: are these ratings interchangeable? Mov Disord 2003;18:985-92.
28. Bennett DA, Shannon KM, Beckett LA, et al. Metric properties of nurses' ratings of parkinsonian signs with a modified UPDRS. Neurology 1997;49:1580-7.
29. Ramaker C, Marinus J, Stiggelbout AM, et al. Systematic evaluation of rating scales for impairment and disability in Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 2002;17:867-76.
30. Kazis L, Anderson J, Meenan R. Effects sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989;27(Suppl.):S178-89.
31. Martínez-Martín P, Valldeoriola F, Molinuevo JL, et al. Pallidotomy and quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease: an early study. Mov Disord 2000;15:65-70.
32. Martínez Martín P, Valldeoriola F, Tolosa EP, et al. Bilateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation and quality of life in advanced Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 2002;17:372-7.
33. Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193-205.
34. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales. A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
35. Behl P, Stefurak TL, Black SE. Cognitive markers of progression in Alzheimer's disease. Can J Neurol Sci 2005;32:140-51.
36. Liang MH, Larson MG, Cullen KE, et al. Comparative measurement efficiency and sensitivity of five health status instruments for arthritis research. Arthritis Rheum 1985;28:542-7.
37. Stockler MR, Osoba D, Goodwin P, et al. Responsiveness to change in health-related quality of life in a randomized clinical trial: a comparison of the prostate cancer specific quality of life instrument (PROSQOLI) with analogous scales from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and a trial specific module. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:137-45.
38. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.
39. Fayers PM, Machin D. Quality of Life. Assessment, Analysis and Interpretation. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., 2000.
40. Wright JG, Young NL. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:239-46.
41. Stata Corp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 8.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation, 2003.
42. McHorney C, Tarlov A. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 1995;4:293-307.
43. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, et al. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 1998;2:7-8.
44. Stadnyk K, Calder J, Rockwood K. Testing the measurement properties of the Short Form-36 Health Survey in a frail elderly population. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:827-35.
45. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincot-Raven Publishers, 1996.
46. Moran LA, Guyatt GH, Norman GR. Establishing the minimal number of items for a responsive, valid, health-related quality of life instrument. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:571-9.
47. Wyrwich KW, Wolinsky FD. Identifying meaningful intra-individual change standards for health-related quality of life measures. J Eval Clin Pract 2000;6:39-49.
48. Guyatt G, Osoba D, Wu AW, et al. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 2002;77:371-83.
49. O'Connor RJ, Cano SJ, Thompson AJ, et al. Exploring rating scale responsiveness. Does the total score reflect the sum of its parts? Neurology 2004;62:1842-4.
50. Norman GR, Stratford P, Regehr G. Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:869-79.
51. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimally important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989;10:407-15.
52. Lang AET, Fahn S. Assessment of Parkinson's disease. In: Munsat TL, ed. Quantification of Neurologic Deficit. Boston, MA: Butterworths, 1989.
53. Ropper AH, Brown RH. Adams and Victor's Principles of Neurology (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Medical Publ. Div., 2005.