ArticlePrion2025
Development of a user guide to support administration of the MRC Prion Disease Rating Scale in research and clinical settings for prion diseases.
Article in Prion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prion diseases (PrD) are a group of progressive, fatal, neurodegenerative diseases, for which the Medical Research Council Prion Disease Rating Scale (MRC Scale) can be used to assess patients' functional deterioration. Findings from previous qualitative interviews with caregivers and clinical experts identified potential ambiguities in the scale that could lead to inconsistent scoring within and/or between raters.
methodsA draft User Guide was developed based on findings from a previous qualitative study. The draft included clarifications regarding domain wording, scoring levels, and guidance for response option selection. Five clinical experts with PrD management experience provided written feedback on the draft User Guide, which was incorporated into a revised User Guide. A 90-minute consensus meeting was then held with these experts to confirm the final content to be included in the User Guide.
resultsThe final User Guide was designed to accompany the MRC Scale and assist with rater decisions related to which response option most accurately describes a patient's health status. Conclusions: The User Guide is expected to be a valuable complement to the MRC Scale, which is poised to rise in use and prominence as global clinical research efforts accelerate to address the significant unmet need of PrD patients.
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.