Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35062955›Full record

ReviewHealth and quality of life outcomes2022

Qualitative measures that assess functional disability and quality of life in ALS.

Susan L Hartmaier, Thomas Rhodes, Suzanne F Cook, Courtney Schlusser, Chao Chen, Steve Han, Neta Zach, Venkatesha Murthy, Shreya Davé

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Assessing the psychometric properties of quality of life measures in individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Considerations for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) Clinical Trial Design.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2022
    Review
  18. Review
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Susan L HartmaierCERobs Consulting, LLC, Wrightsville Beach, NC, USA. drsusan@bhstrategy.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2559-5667
Thomas RhodesCERobs Consulting, LLC, Wrightsville Beach, NC, USA.
Suzanne F CookCERobs Consulting, LLC, Wrightsville Beach, NC, USA.
Courtney SchlusserCERobs Consulting, LLC, Wrightsville Beach, NC, USA.
Chao ChenTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Steve HanTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Neta ZachTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Venkatesha MurthyTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Shreya DavéTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Takeda (United States) · USABS Consulting (United States) · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelection of appropriate trial endpoints and outcome measures is particularly important in rare disease and rapidly progressing disease such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) where the challenges to conducting clinical trials, are substantial: patient and disease heterogeneity, limited understanding of exact disease pathophysiology, and lack of robust and available biomarkers. To address these challenges in ALS, the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale-Revised version (ALSFRS-R) was developed and has become a key primary endpoint in ALS clinical trials to assess functional disability and disease progression, often replacing survival as a primary outcome. However, increased understanding of the ALS disease journey and improvements in assistive technology for ALS patients have exposed issues with the ALSFRS-R, including non-linearity, multidimensionality and floor and ceiling effects that could challenge its continued utility as a primary outcome measure in ALS clinical trials. Recently, other qualitative scale measures of functioning disability have been developed to help address these issues. With this in mind, we conducted a literature search aimed at identifying both established and promising new measures for potential use in clinical trials.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Google, Google Scholar, and the reference sections of key studies to identify papers that discussed qualitative measures of functional status for potential use in ALS studies. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov to identify functional status and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures that have been used in ALS interventional studies.

resultsIn addition to the ALSFRS-R, we identified several newer qualitative scales including ALSFRS-EX, ALS-MITOS, CNS-BFS, DALS-15, MND-DS, and ROADS. Strengths and limitations of each measure were identified and discussed, along with their potential to act as a primary or secondary outcome to assess patient functional status in ALS clinical trials.

conclusionThis paper serves as a reference guide for researchers deciding which qualitative measures to use as endpoints in their ALS clinical trials to assess functional status. This paper also discusses the importance of including ALS HRQoL and ALS cognitive screens in future clinical trials to assess the value of a new ALS therapy more comprehensively.

Indexed as

Amyotrophic Lateral SclerosisPersons with DisabilitiesDisease ProgressionHumansQuality of LifeALSALS cognitive screensALSFRS-RClinical trialsHRQoLQualitative outcome measures

Identifiers

PMID35062955
PMCPMC8781297
OpenAlexW4206387730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.