Trial reportJournal of neurology2022
Inter-method reliability of the modified Rankin Scale in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage.
Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex Disparities in Intracranial Aneurysm Trial Participation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of Hope on Stroke Patients Receiving a Spiritual Care Program in Iran: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of religion and health · 2024Trial
- Knowledge on hypertension among hypertensive stroke survivors in Ghana: A cross-sectional, multicenter study.Equity neuroscience · 2026Article
- Results of Endovascular Treatment of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms and Recanalization Rate After a Five-Year Follow-Up Period.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Long-term outcomes after non-aneurysmal, non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage: a prospective multicenter outcome study.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a multicenter cohort study.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Development of a novel nomogram for predicting prognosis of North Chinese with autoimmune cerebellar ataxia.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Longitudinal change of serum AIM2 levels after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and its prognostic significance: a two-center prospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Study on prognosis of acutely ruptured intracranial aneurysms (SPARTA): a protocol for a multicentre prospective cohort study.BMC neurology · 2024Article
- One-Year Disability Trajectories and Long-Term Cardiovascular Events, Recurrent Stroke, and Mortality After Ischemic Stroke.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Review
- Comparison of long-term clinical outcome after endovascular versus neurosurgical treatment of ruptured intracranial anterior circulation aneurysms: A single-centre experience.Brain & spine · 2024Article
- Association of Hemoglobin Decrement During Hospitalization with Prognosis of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage and Mediation Effects of Cerebral Infarction and Pneumonia.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Should individual timeline and serial CT/MRI panels of all patients be presented in acute brain insult cohorts? A pilot study of 45 patients with decompressive craniectomy after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.Acta neurochirurgica · 2023Review
- Patient Relevance of the Modified Rankin Scale in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research: An International Cross-sectional Survey.Neurology · 2023Article
- The role of microsurgery for poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhages in the endovascular era.Acta neurochirurgica · 2022Article
- Made to measure-Selecting outcomes in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage research.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe modified Rankin Scale (mRS) is one of the most frequently used outcome measures in trials in patients with an aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). The assessment method of the mRS is often not clearly described in trials, while the method used might influence the mRS score. The aim of this study is to evaluate the inter-method reliability of different assessment methods of the mRS.
methodsThis is a prospective, randomized, multicenter study with follow-up at 6 weeks and 6 months. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with aSAH were randomized to either a structured interview or a self-assessment of the mRS. Patients were seen by a physician who assigned an mRS score, followed by either the structured interview or the self-assessment. Inter-method reliability was assessed with the quadratic weighted kappa score and percentage of agreement. Assessment of feasibility of the self-assessment was done by a feasibility questionnaire.
resultsThe quadratic weighted kappa was 0.60 between the assessment of the physician and structured interview and 0.56 between assessment of the physician and self-assessment. Percentage agreement was, respectively, 50.8 and 19.6%. The assessment of the mRS through a structured interview and by self-assessment resulted in systematically higher mRS scores than the mRS scored by the physician. Self-assessment of the mRS was proven feasible. DISCUSSION: The mRS scores obtained with different assessment methods differ significantly. The agreement between the scores is low, although the reliability between the assessment methods is good. This should be considered when using the mRS in clinical trials.
trial registrationwww.trialregister.nl ; Unique identifier: NL7859.
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.