Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment
Identifieur interne : 000514 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000513; suivant : 000515Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment
Auteurs : Cynthia L. Comella ; Sue Leurgans ; Joanne Wuu ; Glenn T. Stebbins ; Teresa ChmuraSource :
- Movement Disorders [ 0885-3185 ] ; 2003-03.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
The evaluation of dystonia requires a reliable rating scale. The widely used Fahn‐Marsden Scale (F‐M) has not been sufficiently tested across multiple centers and investigators. The Dystonia Study Group developed the Unified Dystonia Rating Scale (UDRS) and a Global Dystonia Rating Scale (GDS) to serve as instruments to assess dystonia severity. In this study, 25 dystonia experts evaluated the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS for internal consistency and reliability. One hundred dystonia patients were videotaped using a standardized videotape protocol. Each examiner rated 20 patients using the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS in random order. The examiner then assessed each scale for ease of use. Statistical analysis used Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), generalized weighted κ statistic, and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The UDRS, F‐M, and GDS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.89–0.93) and good to excellent correlation among the raters (ICC range from 0.71–0.78). Inter‐rater agreement was fair to excellent (Kendall's 0.54–0.87; κ 0.37–0.91) being lowest for eyes, jaw, face, and larynx. The modifying ratings (Duration in the UDRS and Provoking Factor in the F‐M) showed less agreement than the motor severity ratings. Among scales, the total scores correlated (Pearson's r, 0.977–0.983). Overall, 74% of raters found the GDS the easiest to apply. The GDS with its simplicity and ease of application may be the most useful dystonia rating scale. © 2002 Movement Disorder Society
Url:
DOI: 10.1002/mds.10377
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title><author><name sortKey="Comella, Cynthia L" sort="Comella, Cynthia L" uniqKey="Comella C" first="Cynthia L." last="Comella">Cynthia L. Comella</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Leurgans, Sue" sort="Leurgans, Sue" uniqKey="Leurgans S" first="Sue" last="Leurgans">Sue Leurgans</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Wuu, Joanne" sort="Wuu, Joanne" uniqKey="Wuu J" first="Joanne" last="Wuu">Joanne Wuu</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Stebbins, Glenn T" sort="Stebbins, Glenn T" uniqKey="Stebbins G" first="Glenn T." last="Stebbins">Glenn T. Stebbins</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Chmura, Teresa" sort="Chmura, Teresa" uniqKey="Chmura T" first="Teresa" last="Chmura">Teresa Chmura</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518</idno><date when="2003" year="2003">2003</date><idno type="doi">10.1002/mds.10377</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000514</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title><author><name sortKey="Comella, Cynthia L" sort="Comella, Cynthia L" uniqKey="Comella C" first="Cynthia L." last="Comella">Cynthia L. Comella</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Leurgans, Sue" sort="Leurgans, Sue" uniqKey="Leurgans S" first="Sue" last="Leurgans">Sue Leurgans</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Wuu, Joanne" sort="Wuu, Joanne" uniqKey="Wuu J" first="Joanne" last="Wuu">Joanne Wuu</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Stebbins, Glenn T" sort="Stebbins, Glenn T" uniqKey="Stebbins G" first="Glenn T." last="Stebbins">Glenn T. Stebbins</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Chmura, Teresa" sort="Chmura, Teresa" uniqKey="Chmura T" first="Teresa" last="Chmura">Teresa Chmura</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Movement Disorders</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Mov. Disord.</title><idno type="ISSN">0885-3185</idno><idno type="eISSN">1531-8257</idno><imprint><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><pubPlace>New York</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2003-03">2003-03</date><biblScope unit="vol">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="303">303</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="312">312</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0885-3185</idno></series><idno type="istex">766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1002/mds.10377</idno><idno type="ArticleID">MDS10377</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0885-3185</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>dystonia</term><term>movement disorder</term><term>outcome assessment</term><term>rating scale</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The evaluation of dystonia requires a reliable rating scale. The widely used Fahn‐Marsden Scale (F‐M) has not been sufficiently tested across multiple centers and investigators. The Dystonia Study Group developed the Unified Dystonia Rating Scale (UDRS) and a Global Dystonia Rating Scale (GDS) to serve as instruments to assess dystonia severity. In this study, 25 dystonia experts evaluated the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS for internal consistency and reliability. One hundred dystonia patients were videotaped using a standardized videotape protocol. Each examiner rated 20 patients using the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS in random order. The examiner then assessed each scale for ease of use. Statistical analysis used Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), generalized weighted κ statistic, and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The UDRS, F‐M, and GDS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.89–0.93) and good to excellent correlation among the raters (ICC range from 0.71–0.78). Inter‐rater agreement was fair to excellent (Kendall's 0.54–0.87; κ 0.37–0.91) being lowest for eyes, jaw, face, and larynx. The modifying ratings (Duration in the UDRS and Provoking Factor in the F‐M) showed less agreement than the motor severity ratings. Among scales, the total scores correlated (Pearson's r, 0.977–0.983). Overall, 74% of raters found the GDS the easiest to apply. The GDS with its simplicity and ease of application may be the most useful dystonia rating scale. © 2002 Movement Disorder Society</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Cynthia L. Comella MD</name><affiliations><json:string>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Sue Leurgans PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Joanne Wuu ScM</name><affiliations><json:string>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Glenn T. Stebbins PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Teresa Chmura BA</name><affiliations><json:string>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>dystonia</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>rating scale</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>movement disorder</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>outcome assessment</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>The evaluation of dystonia requires a reliable rating scale. The widely used Fahn‐Marsden Scale (F‐M) has not been sufficiently tested across multiple centers and investigators. The Dystonia Study Group developed the Unified Dystonia Rating Scale (UDRS) and a Global Dystonia Rating Scale (GDS) to serve as instruments to assess dystonia severity. In this study, 25 dystonia experts evaluated the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS for internal consistency and reliability. One hundred dystonia patients were videotaped using a standardized videotape protocol. Each examiner rated 20 patients using the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS in random order. The examiner then assessed each scale for ease of use. Statistical analysis used Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), generalized weighted κ statistic, and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The UDRS, F‐M, and GDS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.89–0.93) and good to excellent correlation among the raters (ICC range from 0.71–0.78). Inter‐rater agreement was fair to excellent (Kendall's 0.54–0.87; κ 0.37–0.91) being lowest for eyes, jaw, face, and larynx. The modifying ratings (Duration in the UDRS and Provoking Factor in the F‐M) showed less agreement than the motor severity ratings. Among scales, the total scores correlated (Pearson's r, 0.977–0.983). Overall, 74% of raters found the GDS the easiest to apply. The GDS with its simplicity and ease of application may be the most useful dystonia rating scale. © 2002 Movement Disorder Society</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.484</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>612 x 810 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>1518</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>4772</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>29879</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>10</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>226</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title><corporate><json:item><name></name></json:item></corporate><genre><json:string>Serial article</json:string></genre><host><volume>18</volume><pages><total>10</total><last>312</last><first>303</first></pages><issn><json:string>0885-3185</json:string></issn><issue>3</issue><subject><json:item><value>Research Article</value></json:item></subject><genre></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><title>Movement Disorders</title><doi><json:string>10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</json:string></doi></host><publicationDate>2003</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2003</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1002/mds.10377</json:string></doi><id>766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader type="text"><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><pubPlace>New York</pubPlace><availability><p>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</p></availability><date>2003</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note>Dystonia Medical Research Foundation</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title><author><orgName>and The Dystonia Study Group</orgName></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Cynthia L.</forename><surname>Comella</surname><roleName type="degree">MD</roleName></persName><note type="correspondence"><p>Correspondence: Department of Neurological Sciences, Rush Presbyterian‐St. Luke's Medical Center, Suite 755, 1725 West Harrison, Chicago, IL 60612</p></note><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Sue</forename><surname>Leurgans</surname><roleName type="degree">PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Joanne</forename><surname>Wuu</surname><roleName type="degree">ScM</roleName></persName><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Glenn T.</forename><surname>Stebbins</surname><roleName type="degree">PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Teresa</forename><surname>Chmura</surname><roleName type="degree">BA</roleName></persName><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Movement Disorders</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Mov. Disord.</title><idno type="pISSN">0885-3185</idno><idno type="eISSN">1531-8257</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</idno><imprint><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><pubPlace>New York</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2003-03"></date><biblScope unit="vol">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="303">303</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="312">312</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1002/mds.10377</idno><idno type="ArticleID">MDS10377</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2003</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The evaluation of dystonia requires a reliable rating scale. The widely used Fahn‐Marsden Scale (F‐M) has not been sufficiently tested across multiple centers and investigators. The Dystonia Study Group developed the Unified Dystonia Rating Scale (UDRS) and a Global Dystonia Rating Scale (GDS) to serve as instruments to assess dystonia severity. In this study, 25 dystonia experts evaluated the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS for internal consistency and reliability. One hundred dystonia patients were videotaped using a standardized videotape protocol. Each examiner rated 20 patients using the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS in random order. The examiner then assessed each scale for ease of use. Statistical analysis used Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), generalized weighted κ statistic, and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The UDRS, F‐M, and GDS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.89–0.93) and good to excellent correlation among the raters (ICC range from 0.71–0.78). Inter‐rater agreement was fair to excellent (Kendall's 0.54–0.87; κ 0.37–0.91) being lowest for eyes, jaw, face, and larynx. The modifying ratings (Duration in the UDRS and Provoking Factor in the F‐M) showed less agreement than the motor severity ratings. Among scales, the total scores correlated (Pearson's r, 0.977–0.983). Overall, 74% of raters found the GDS the easiest to apply. The GDS with its simplicity and ease of application may be the most useful dystonia rating scale. © 2002 Movement Disorder Society</p></abstract><textClass xml:lang="en"><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Keywords</head><item><term>dystonia</term></item><item><term>rating scale</term></item><item><term>movement disorder</term></item><item><term>outcome assessment</term></item></list></keywords></textClass><textClass><keywords scheme="Journal Subject"><list><head>Article category</head><item><term>Research Article</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2002-07-05">Received</change><change when="2002-08-29">Registration</change><change when="2003-03">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisherName><publisherLoc>New York</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi registered="yes">10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</doi><issn type="print">0885-3185</issn><issn type="electronic">1531-8257</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="MDS"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" xml:lang="en" sort="MOVEMENT DISORDERS">Movement Disorders</title><title type="short">Mov. Disord.</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="30"><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1002/mds.v18:3</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="18">18</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue">3</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2003-03">March 2003</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="90" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1002/mds.10377</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="MDS10377"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="10"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="articleCategory">Research Article</title><title type="tocHeading1">Research Articles</title></titleGroup><copyright ownership="thirdParty">Copyright © 2003 Movement Disorders Society</copyright><eventGroup><event type="manuscriptReceived" date="2002-07-05"></event><event type="manuscriptRevised" date="2002-08-29"></event><event type="manuscriptAccepted" date="2002-08-29"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2002-12-20"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2003-02-28"></event><event type="publishedOnlineAcceptedOrEarlyUnpaginated" date="2002-12-20"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:JWSART34_TO_WML3G version:2.4.7 mode:FullText source:FullText result:FullText" date="2011-02-24"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-02"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-31"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst">303</numbering><numbering type="pageLast">312</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Department of Neurological Sciences, Rush Presbyterian‐St. Luke's Medical Center, Suite 755, 1725 West Harrison, Chicago, IL 60612</correspondenceTo><objectNameGroup><objectName elementName="appendix">APPENDIX</objectName><objectName elementName="appendix">Appendix</objectName></objectNameGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:MDS.MDS10377.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="1"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="8"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="19"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="5740"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" xml:lang="en">Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title><title type="short" xml:lang="en">Rating Scales for Dystonia</title></titleGroup><creators><creator xml:id="au1" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1" corresponding="yes"><personName><givenNames>Cynthia L.</givenNames><familyName>Comella</familyName><degrees>MD</degrees></personName><contactDetails><email>ccomella@rush.edu</email></contactDetails></creator><creator xml:id="au2" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1"><personName><givenNames>Sue</givenNames><familyName>Leurgans</familyName><degrees>PhD</degrees></personName></creator><creator xml:id="au3" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1"><personName><givenNames>Joanne</givenNames><familyName>Wuu</familyName><degrees>ScM</degrees></personName></creator><creator xml:id="au4" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1"><personName><givenNames>Glenn T.</givenNames><familyName>Stebbins</familyName><degrees>PhD</degrees></personName></creator><creator xml:id="au5" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1"><personName><givenNames>Teresa</givenNames><familyName>Chmura</familyName><degrees>BA</degrees></personName></creator><creator xml:id="au6" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1"><groupName>and The Dystonia Study Group</groupName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="af1" countryCode="US" type="organization"><unparsedAffiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en" type="author"><keyword xml:id="kwd1">dystonia</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd2">rating scale</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd3">movement disorder</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd4">outcome assessment</keyword></keywordGroup><fundingInfo><fundingAgency>Dystonia Medical Research Foundation</fundingAgency></fundingInfo><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title><p>The evaluation of dystonia requires a reliable rating scale. The widely used Fahn‐Marsden Scale (F‐M) has not been sufficiently tested across multiple centers and investigators. The Dystonia Study Group developed the Unified Dystonia Rating Scale (UDRS) and a Global Dystonia Rating Scale (GDS) to serve as instruments to assess dystonia severity. In this study, 25 dystonia experts evaluated the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS for internal consistency and reliability. One hundred dystonia patients were videotaped using a standardized videotape protocol. Each examiner rated 20 patients using the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS in random order. The examiner then assessed each scale for ease of use. Statistical analysis used Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), generalized weighted κ statistic, and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The UDRS, F‐M, and GDS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.89–0.93) and good to excellent correlation among the raters (ICC range from 0.71–0.78). Inter‐rater agreement was fair to excellent (Kendall's 0.54–0.87; κ 0.37–0.91) being lowest for eyes, jaw, face, and larynx. The modifying ratings (Duration in the UDRS and Provoking Factor in the F‐M) showed less agreement than the motor severity ratings. Among scales, the total scores correlated (Pearson's <i>r</i>, 0.977–0.983). Overall, 74% of raters found the GDS the easiest to apply. The GDS with its simplicity and ease of application may be the most useful dystonia rating scale. © 2002 Movement Disorder Society</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><!--Version 0.6 générée le 4-12-2015--><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Rating Scales for Dystonia</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Cynthia L.</namePart><namePart type="family">Comella</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">MD</namePart><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation><description>Correspondence: Department of Neurological Sciences, Rush Presbyterian‐St. Luke's Medical Center, Suite 755, 1725 West Harrison, Chicago, IL 60612</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Sue</namePart><namePart type="family">Leurgans</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">PhD</namePart><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Joanne</namePart><namePart type="family">Wuu</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">ScM</namePart><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Glenn T.</namePart><namePart type="family">Stebbins</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">PhD</namePart><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Teresa</namePart><namePart type="family">Chmura</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">BA</namePart><affiliation>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="corporate"><namePart>and The Dystonia Study Group</namePart><description>Rush‐Presbyterian–St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA</description></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre authority="originalCategForm">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">New York</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2003-03</dateIssued><dateCaptured encoding="w3cdtf">2002-07-05</dateCaptured><dateValid encoding="w3cdtf">2002-08-29</dateValid><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2003</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="figures">1</extent><extent unit="tables">8</extent><extent unit="references">19</extent><extent unit="words">5740</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">The evaluation of dystonia requires a reliable rating scale. The widely used Fahn‐Marsden Scale (F‐M) has not been sufficiently tested across multiple centers and investigators. The Dystonia Study Group developed the Unified Dystonia Rating Scale (UDRS) and a Global Dystonia Rating Scale (GDS) to serve as instruments to assess dystonia severity. In this study, 25 dystonia experts evaluated the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS for internal consistency and reliability. One hundred dystonia patients were videotaped using a standardized videotape protocol. Each examiner rated 20 patients using the UDRS, F‐M, and GDS in random order. The examiner then assessed each scale for ease of use. Statistical analysis used Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), generalized weighted κ statistic, and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The UDRS, F‐M, and GDS showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.89–0.93) and good to excellent correlation among the raters (ICC range from 0.71–0.78). Inter‐rater agreement was fair to excellent (Kendall's 0.54–0.87; κ 0.37–0.91) being lowest for eyes, jaw, face, and larynx. The modifying ratings (Duration in the UDRS and Provoking Factor in the F‐M) showed less agreement than the motor severity ratings. Among scales, the total scores correlated (Pearson's r, 0.977–0.983). Overall, 74% of raters found the GDS the easiest to apply. The GDS with its simplicity and ease of application may be the most useful dystonia rating scale. © 2002 Movement Disorder Society</abstract><note type="funding">Dystonia Medical Research Foundation</note><subject lang="en"><genre>Keywords</genre><topic>dystonia</topic><topic>rating scale</topic><topic>movement disorder</topic><topic>outcome assessment</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Movement Disorders</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Mov. Disord.</title></titleInfo><subject><genre>article category</genre><topic>Research Article</topic></subject><identifier type="ISSN">0885-3185</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1531-8257</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">MDS</identifier><part><date>2003</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>18</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>3</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>303</start><end>312</end><total>10</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1002/mds.10377</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">MDS10377</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">Copyright © 2003 Movement Disorders Society</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordOrigin>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</recordOrigin><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/MovDisordV3/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000514 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000514 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= MovDisordV3
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:766C1E4D4EAE02B7D28FBC775424BC27F5829518
|texte= Rating scales for dystonia: A multicenter assessment
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23. |  |