26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Standardized Nomenclature for Modified Rankin Scale Global Disability Outcomes: Consensus Recommendations From Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable XI

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The modified Rankin Scale (mRS), a 7-level, clinician-reported, measure of global disability, is the most widely employed outcome scale in acute stroke trials. The scale’s original development preceded the advent of modern clinimetrics, but substantial subsequent work has been performed to enable the mRS to meet robust contemporary scale standards. Prior research and consensus recommendations have focused on modernizing 2 aspects of the mRS: operationalized assignment of scale scores and statistical analysis of scale distributions. Another important characteristic of the mRS still requiring elaboration and specification to contemporary clinimetric standards is the Naming of scale outcomes. Recent clinical trials have used a bewildering variety, often mutually contradictory, of rubrics to describe scale states. Understanding of the meaning of mRS outcomes by clinicians, patients, and other clinical trial stakeholders would be greatly enhanced by use of a harmonized, uniform set of labels for the distinctive mRS outcomes that would be used consistently across trials. This statement advances such recommended rubrics, developed by the Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable collaboration using an iterative, mixed-methods process. Specific guidance is provided for health state terms (eg, Symptomatic but Nondisabled for mRS score 1; requires constant care for mRS score 5) and valence terms (eg, excellent for mRS score 1; very poor for mRS score 5) to employ for 23 distinct numeric mRS outcomes, including: all individual 7 mRS levels; all 12 positive and negative dichotomized mRS ranges, positive and negative sliding dichotomies; and utility-weighted analysis of the mRS.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Contributors
          (View ORCID Profile)
          (View ORCID Profile)
          Journal
          Stroke
          Stroke
          Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
          0039-2499
          1524-4628
          July 29 2021
          Affiliations
          [1 ]Department of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA (J.L.S.).
          [2 ]Phyathai Comprehensive Stroke Center, Phyathai 1 Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand (N.C.).
          [3 ]Department of Neurology & Melbourne Brain Centre, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Australia (B.C.V.C.).
          [4 ]Memorial Hermann Hospital-Texas Medical Center, Houston (J.C.G.).
          [5 ]Department of Clinical Neuroscience and Hotchkiss Brain Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary and Foothills Medical Centre, AB, Canada (M.D.H.).
          [6 ]Department of Neurology and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Cincinnati, OH (P.K.).
          [7 ]Biogen, Cambridge, MA (J.L.).
          [8 ]Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences and the Stanford Stroke Center, Stanford University (M.G.L.).
          [9 ]Division of Stroke and Neurocritical Care, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences and the Stanford Stroke Center, Stanford University (C.V., G.W.A.).
          Article
          10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.034480
          34320814
          b557a695-1c5a-4ca5-9763-424c6f579463
          © 2021
          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article