Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25573017›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2015

The Mental Disability Military Assessment Tool: A Reliable Tool for Determining Disability in Veterans with Post-traumatic Stress Disorder.

Andrea S Fokkens, Johan W Groothoff, Jac J L van der Klink, Roel Popping, Roy E Stewart, Lex van de Ven, Sandra Brouwer, Jolanda Tuinstra

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea S FokkensDepartment of Applied Research in Care (FA12), University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 196, 9700 AD, Groningen, The Netherlands, a.s.fokkens@umcg.nl.
Johan W Groothoff
Jac J L van der Klink
Roel Popping
Roy E Stewart
Lex van de Ven
Sandra Brouwer
Jolanda Tuinstra
University of Groningen · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAn assessment tool was developed to assess disability in veterans who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to a military mission. The objective of this study was to determine the reliability, intra-rater and inter-rater variation of the Mental Disability Military (MDM) assessment tool.

methodsTwenty-four assessment interviews of veterans with an insurance physician were videotaped. Each videotaped interview was assessed by a group of five independent raters on limitations of the veterans using the MDM assessment tool. After 2 months the raters repeated this procedure. Next the intra-rater and inter-rater variation was assessed with an adjusted version of AG09 computing weighted percentage agreement.

resultsThe results of this study showed that both the intra-rater variation and inter-rater variation on the ten subcategories of the MDM assessment tool were small, with an agreement of 84-100% within raters and 93-100% between raters.

conclusionsThe MDM assessment tool proves to be a reliable instrument to measure PTSD limitations in functioning in Dutch military veterans who apply for disability compensation. Further research is needed to assess the validity of this instrument.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationAdultFemaleHumansInterview, PsychologicalMaleMilitary MedicineNetherlandsObserver VariationPersons with DisabilitiesReproducibility of ResultsStress Disorders, Post-TraumaticVeterans

Identifiers

PMID25573017
OpenAlexW2066688865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.