Friedreich's ataxia impact scale: A new measure striving to provide the flexibility required by today's studies

Movement Disorders

Volumn 24, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 984-992

  Cano, Stefan J ^a,b   Riazi, Afsane ^a   Schapira, Anthony H V ^b   Cooper, J Mark ^c   Hobart, Jeremy C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b PENINSULA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Friedreich's ataxia; Quality of life; Rasch analysis; Rating scale; Reliability; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY MOVEMENT; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; FEMALE; FRIEDREICH ATAXIA; FRIEDREICH ATAXIA IMPACT SCALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOOD; PHYSICAL CAPACITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RATING SCALE; SELF CONCEPT; SOCIAL ISOLATION; SPEECH; VALIDITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AFFECT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; EXTREMITIES; FEMALE; FRIEDREICH ATAXIA; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOVEMENT; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPEECH; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 67651156105     PISSN: 08853185     EISSN: 15318257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mds.22420     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Hobart JC, Cano SJ, Zajicek JP, Thompson AJ. Rating scales as outcome measures for clinical trials in neurology: problems, solutions, and recommendations. Lancet Neurol 2007;6:1094-1105.
2. Hobart JC, Freeman JA, Lamping DL, Fitzpatrick R, Thompson AJ. The SF-36 in multiple sclerosis: why basic assumptions must be tested. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001;71:363-370.
3. Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Freeman JA, et al. Evidence-based measurement: which disability scale for neurological rehabilitation? Neurology 2001;57:639-644.
4. Riazi A, Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Fitzpatrick R, Thompson AJ. Evidence-based measurement in multiple sclerosis: the psychometric properties of the physical and psychological dimensions of three quality of life rating scales. Mult Scler 2003;9:411-419.
5. United States Food and Drug Administration. Patient reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labelling claims. 2006. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/prolbl.pdf.
6. Revicki D. FDA draft guidance and health-outcomes research. Lancet 2007;369:540-542.
7. European Medicines Agency. Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of the health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products. London: EMEA; 2006. Available at: http://www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/ewp/13939104en.pdf.
8. Freeman JA, Hobart JC, Thompson AJ. Does adding MS-specific items to a generic measure (the SF-36) improve measurement? Neurology 2001;57:68-74.
9. Friedreich N. Uber degenerative atrophie der spinalen hinter-strange. Virchows Arch Pathol Anat 1863;26:391-419.
10. Campuzano V, Montermini L, Molto M, et al. Friedreich's ataxia: autosomal recessive disease caused by an intronic GAA triplet repeat expansion. Science 1996;271:1423-1427.
11. Rustin P, von Kleist-Retzow J, Chantrel-Groussard K, Sidi D, Munnich A, Rotig A. Effect of idebenone on cardiomyopathy in Friedreich's ataxia: a preliminary study. Lancet 1999;354:477-479.
12. Lodi R, Rajagopalan B, Hart P, et al. Antioxidant treatment improves in vivo cardiac and skeletal muscle bioenergetics in patients with Friedreich's Ataxia. Ann Neurol 2001;49:590-596.
13. Richardson D, Mouralian C, Ponka P, Becker E. Development of potential iron chelators for the treatment of Friedreich's ataxia: ligands that mobilize mitochondrial iron. Biochim Biophys Acta 2001;1536:133-140.
14. Subramony SH, May W, Lynch D, et al. Measuring Friedreich ataxia: interrater reliability of a neurologic rating scale. Neurology 2005;64:1261-1262.
15. Trouillas P, Takayanagi T, Hallett M, Currier R, Subramony S, Wessel K. International cooperative ataxia rating scale for pharmacological assessment of the cerebellar syndrome. J Neurol Sci 1997;145:205-211.
16. Mori M, Adachi Y, Mori N, et al. Double-blind crossover study of branched-chain amino acid therapy in patients with spinocerebellar degeneration. J Neurol Sci 2002;195:149-152.
17. Cano SJ, Hobart JC, Hart PE, Kolipara LVP, Schapira AHV, Cooper JM. The International Co-operative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS): an appropriate rating scale for Friedreich's Ataxia? Mov Disord 2005;20:1585-1591.
18. Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Thompson A. Evaluating neurological outcome measures: the bare essentials. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996;60:127-130.
19. Riazi A, Cano SJ, Cooper JM, Bradley JL, Schapira AH, Hobart JC. Coordinating outcomes measurement in ataxia research: do some widely used generic rating scales tick the boxes? Mov Disord 2006;21:1396-1403.
20. Dillman D. Mail and telephone surveys: the total design method. New York: Wiley; 1978.
21. Ware JE, Harris WJ, Gandek B, Rogers BW, Reese PR. MAP-R for windows: multitrait/multi-item analysis program - revised user's guide version 1. Boston, MA: Health Assessment Lab; 1997.
22. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1960.
23. Rasch G. An item analysis which takes individual differences into account. Br J Math Stat Psychol 1966;19:49-57.
24. Wright BD. Solving measurement problems with the Rasch model. J Educ Meas 1977;14:97-116.
25. Andrich D. A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika 1978;43:561-573.
26. Andrich D. An index of person separation in latent trait theory, the traditional KR20 index, and the Guttman scale response pattern. Educ Psychol Res 1982;9:95-104.
27. Andrich D. Rasch models for measurement. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Publications; 1988.
28. Andrich D. Implication and applications of modern test theory in the context of outcomes based research. Stud Educ Eval 2002; 28:103-121.
29. Hobart JC, Riazi A, Thompson AJ, et al. Getting the measure of spasticity in multiple sclerosis: the Multiple Sclerosis Spasticity Scale (MSSS-88). Brain 2006;129:224-234.
30. Cano SJ, Warner TT, Linacre JM, et al. Capturing the true burden of dystonia on patients: the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile (CDIP-58). Neurology 2004;63:1629-1633.
31. Hobart JC, Cano SJ. Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in MS: the role of new psychometric methods. Health Technol Assess (in press).
32. RUMM 2020. 4.0 version. Perth: RUMM Laboratory Pty Ltd; 2006.
33. Cano SJ, Hobart JC, Edwards M, et al. CDIP-58 can measure the impact of botulinum toxin treatment in cervical dystonia. Neurology 2006;67:2230-2232.
34. Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Fitzpatrick R, Riazi A, Thompson AJ. The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) - a new patient-based outcome measure. Brain 2001;124:962-973.
35. Riazi A, Hobart JC, Lamping DL, Fitzpatrick R, Thompson AJ. Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): reliability and validity in hospital based samples. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002;73:701-704.