ArticlePloS one2025
Cross-cultural adaptation and multicentric validation of the Italian version of the Simplified Evaluation of CONsciousness Disorders (SECONDs).
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is the recommended tool to assess consciousness in patients with prolonged Disorders of Consciousness (pDoC). However, the time needed to administer it may limit its use. A shorter tool has been validated: the Simplified Evaluation of CONsciousness Disorders (SECONDs). This multicentre study aimed to develop and validate a cross-cultural adaptation of the SECONDs into Italian.
methodsAn interdisciplinary expert team, from both Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi and Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, led the translation processes. Independent certified translators were also involved in a blinded modality. Patients diagnosed with Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome (UWS) or Minimally Conscious State (MCS) admitted to 3 Italian rehabilitation units were enrolled. The CRS-R and SECONDs were administered in 5 sessions over two weeks by 3 blinded examiners at each center (3 times, with 2 sessions conducted by the same examiner). Weighted Fleiss' kappa and Spearman correlation coefficients were used to assess intrarater and interrater reliability and concurrent validity.
resultsSixty adults with pDoC were assessed: 23 women; median age: 64 years; 14 trauma, median post-onset time: 2 months. Intrarater and interrater reliability showed almost perfect agreement (kappa coefficients 0.968 and 0.935, respectively; p<0.001). The comparison of CRS-R vs. SECONDs on the same day or the best out of 5 SECONDs/CRS-R led to a substantial to almost perfect agreement both for the total score of the CRS-R and the SECONDs' Additional Index (ρ = 0.772-1.000; p<0.001) and for the consciousness diagnosis (k = 0.784-0.935; p<0.001). The disagreement rate between the overall best diagnosis of the SECONDs and the best CRS-R diagnosis was 6.7%.
conclusionThe Italian version of the SECONDs has been cross-culturally adapted to serve as a shorter assessment tool for the diagnosis of pDoC. Our study shows its excellent reliability and concurrent validity when compared to the CRS-R.
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.