These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Should we still only rely on EDSS to evaluate disability in multiple sclerosis patients? A study of inter and intra rater reliability.
    Author: Cohen M, Bresch S, Thommel Rocchi O, Morain E, Benoit J, Levraut M, Fakir S, Landes C, Lebrun-Frénay C.
    Journal: Mult Scler Relat Disord; 2021 Sep; 54():103144. PubMed ID: 34274736.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Few studies assessed reliability and inter-rater variability of EDSS and functional parameters (FP) rating. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate inter-rater variability and errors in EDSS and FP rating in junior (JN) and MS Neurologists (MSN). METHOD: Patients with MS were examined by a JN and a MSN on the same day. Each assessor rated FP and EDSS, then used a smartphone app to get an automated calculation for each FP ("smartphone" FP, sFP) and for EDSS ("smartphone" EDSS, sEDSS) from the description of the neurological exam. Inter-rater variability was assessed comparing JN and MSN ratings for each method. Intra-rater variability was assessed comparing traditional and digital rating for a given assessor. RESULT: 103 patients were included. Perfect agreement between JN and MSN was met for 67% and 70% of patients regarding EDSS and sEDSS. Disagreement that could lead to a significant difference in terms of level of disability occurred in 17% for EDSS and 12% for sEDSS (p=0.07). Regarding intra-rater reliability, we found 38 rating discrepancies for JN and 14 for MSN (p=0.04). CONCLUSION: We found a significant inter-rater variability as well as a substantial frequency of rating errors in JN. The use of less subjective, easier-to-rate scales should be encouraged.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]