ArticleNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2020
Self-perceptions on cognitive versus motor disability among neurologists.
Article in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe modified Rankin Scale is a functional outcome measure that disproportionately represents motor deficits. We hypothesize that among physicians who most commonly use the modified Rankin Scale to counsel patients on neurological treatment options, personal perception of acceptable or optimal outcome may be discordant with those described in clinical trials.
methodsA three-question anonymous voluntary survey was emailed to academic and community practicing neurologists and board-eligible or board-certified neurology fellows inquiring about their personal perception of a better quality of life between two choices featuring clinical scenarios that would qualify as modified Rankin Scale 2 and 4 disability outcome scores.
resultsSixty-nine percent of participants were 30-45 years old, 24% were 45-60 years old, and 7% were over 60 years old. Most responders were general neurologists (31.3%). The remaining responders represented multiple subspecialties including neurocritical care, vascular neurology, neurohospitalist medicine, neuromuscular neurology, neurophysiology, child neurology, neuro-oncology, headache, neuroimmunology, movement disorders, and palliative care medicine. Forty-four of 45 neurologists (97.7%) stated they would choose needing a wheelchair if still able to function at their cognitive baseline at work (p < 0.000001). One responder preferred to get around without assistance, despite new cognitive symptoms that would preclude them from working as a physician.
conclusionsThe modified Rankin Scale may not adequately represent preferred outcomes among neurology specialists, particularly with respect to cognitive symptoms. Future studies are needed to characterize long-term cognitive outcomes in patients with acute stroke-related conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.