Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “SCALE”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 397 records · Page 22Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): scale development, measurement properties, and clinical application. North American Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Research Network.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability, construct validity, and sensitivity to change of the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The LEFS was administered to 107 patients with lower-extremity musculoskeletal dysfunction referred to 12 outpatient physical therapy clinics. METHODS: The LEFS was administered during the initial assessment, 24 to 48 hours following the initial assessment, and then at weekly intervals for 4 weeks. The SF-36 (acute version) was administered during the initial assessment and at weekly intervals. A type 2,1 intraclass correlation coefficient was used to estimate test-retest reliability. Pearson correlations and one-way analyses of variance were used to examine construct validity. Spearman rank-order correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationship between an independent prognostic rating of change for each patient and change in the LEFS and SF-36 scores. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of the LEFS scores was excellent (R = .94 [95% lower limit confidence interval (CI) = .89]). Correlations between the LEFS and the SF-36 physical function subscale and physical component score were r=.80 (95% lower limit CI = .73) and r = .64 (95% lower limit CI = .54), respectively. There was a higher correlation between the prognostic rating of change and the LEFS than between the prognostic rating of change and the SF-36 physical function score. The potential error associated with a score on the LEFS at a given point in time is +/-5.3 scale points (90% CI), the minimal detectable change is 9 scale points (90% CI), and the minimal clinically important difference is 9 scale points (90% CI). CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: The LEFS is reliable, and construct validity was supported by comparison with the SF-36. The sensitivity to change of the LEFS was superior to that of the SF-36 in this population. The LEFS is efficient to administer and score and is applicable for research purposes and clinical decision making for individual patients.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed1989

Acceptability of visual analogue scales in the clinical setting: a comparison with verbal rating scales in postoperative pain.

Pain is the clinical symptom most difficult to evaluate. Although clinical trials methodology have permitted assessment of pain objectively through rating scales, these strategies have not been used in clinical setting. The present study was undertaken to determine if visual analogue scales could be useful in the measurement of postoperative pain in usual medical practice. The study comprised 212 patients with abdominal, orthopedic or gynecological surgical procedures within the previous 24 h. Patients evaluated their pain using a verbal rating scale (VRS) of five points or a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 10 cm. The investigators also evaluated patient pain through a VAS. The results obtained showed that a high correlation between VRS and VAS could be established in all patients (p less than 0.001). The VAS of patients and researchers were also found to be highly correlated (p less than 0.001). When values of each group were compared by pain intensity a total agreement of VAS scores at low pain level could be established, but differences were found at high pain intensity levels, suggesting that physicians scored lower than patients when pain was severe to unbearable. It is concluded that VAS could be a reliable method to assess pain in clinical setting.

Adult↗
PubMed1986

Relationship between the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-Classroom Edition and the Vineland Social Maturity Scales.

Results of an investigation of the relationship between the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-Classroom Edition (Harrison, 1985) and its predecessor, the Vineland Social Maturity Scale (Doll, 1953) were presented. Subjects were both educable and trainable mentally retarded children. The concurrent validity of the two scales was moderate, r = .57 to .66. Of greater importance was the finding that the mean scores obtained from the newer instrument were significantly lower than the mean scores for the Vineland Social Maturity Scale.

Achievement↗
PubMed1987

Reliability and validity of the Disability Rating Scale and the Levels of Cognitive Functioning Scale in monitoring recovery from severe head injury.

The Disability Rating Scale (DRS) and the Levels of Cognitive Functioning Scale (LCFS) are both widely used to monitor recovery from head injury, despite the total lack of published research on the reliability and validity of the LCFS, and the fragmented and incomplete reports on these characteristics of the DRS. Forty head-injured inpatients were evaluated with the DRS and LCFS four times weekly throughout their rehabilitation hospitalization. The DRS and LCFS were compared in terms of how consistently ratings could be made by different raters, how stable those ratings were from day to day, their relative correlation with Stover Zeiger (S-Z) ratings collected concurrently at admission, and with S-Z, Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), and Expanded GOS (EGOS) ratings collected concurrently at discharge, and finally in the ability of admission DRS and LCFS scores to predict discharge ratings on the S-Z, GOS, and EGOS. Results suggest that both scales possess significant degrees of test-retest and interrater reliabilities, and of concurrent and predictive validities, but the DRS surpasses the LCFS in nearly every regard. These results offer psychometric justification favoring the use of the DRS for monitoring recovery from head injury.

Adult↗
PubMed1977

Relationships among the Brazelton Neonatal Scale, Bayley Infant Scales, and early temperament.

The present study investigated whether the Brazelton Neonatal Assessment Scale predicts 10-week performance on the Bayley Scales of Infant Development and examined whether early temperament relates to performance on both scales. 18 normal, term infants were studied. Conceptual, a priori scoring dimensions were applied to neonatal assessments at a mean of 8.6 days. Infant temperament data were available for 12 of the subjects at a mean of 13.3 days, and mental and motor development were assessed for all subjects at a mean of 68.8 days. The results indicate that the total of a priori Brazelton scoring dimensions and neonatal state control were predictive of Bayley mental quotients at 10 weeks. Caretakers' judgments of temperamental intensity and distractability at 2 weeks correlated with the Bayley scales and the Brazelton dimensions. Furthermore, dividing the infants into worrisome and optimal groups on the basis of the total produced significant differences in Bayley mental scores.

Attention↗
PubMed1998

The Depression-Happiness Scale: reliability and validity of a bipolar self-report scale.

This article reports two studies aimed at validating the 25-item self-report McGreal and Joseph (1993) Depression-Happiness Scale (D-H S). In the first study, principal component data are reported on the D-H S with 194 respondents. A forced 1-factor solution confirmed the unidimensionality of the scale (item loadings ranged from .38 to .77) and thus the feasibility of a statistically bipolar measure. In the second study, data on the convergent validity of the D-H S with the Beck Depression Inventory (r=-.75) and the Oxford Happiness Inventory (r=.59) with 100 respondents are reported confirming the construct validity of the scale. Implications for research in social and clinical psychology are discussed along with the possible uses of the D-H S in a clinical setting.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1979

The generalizability of verbal IQ as an estimate of full scale IQ on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale.

To assess the validity of the Verbal IQ as a short form for the WAIS, 231 high-IQ outpatient test protocols were analyzed. Correlations between Verbal and Full Scale IQ were positive and significant for both males and females. The average Verbal IQ exceeded the average Full Scale IQ for both sexes as well, but these differences were small. A high percentage of Full Scale IQ classifications were changed when Verbal IQ was used. Thus, Verbal IQ appears partially valid as a WAIS short form for this higher IQ outpatient population. Results are interpreted in terms of Resnick and Entin's short form validity criteria.

Adult↗
PubMed1980

A comparison of the Weschsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised and Leiter International Performance Scale for a group of educationally handicapped adolescents.

Compared the WISC-R and Leiter International Performance Scale IQs for a sample of 42 educationally handicapped adolescents, who ranged in age from 13.1 to 16.5 years. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients and correlated t-values were computed for the data analyses. The results indicated a pattern of positive correlations between WISC-R Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale scores and Leiter scores. WISC-R Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale IQs were found to be significantly higher than Leiter IQs. The findings suggest that generally the same pattern exists for the WISC-R and Leiter as for the WISC and Leiter.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Validation of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Montgommery and Asberg Rating Scales in terms of AGECAT depression cases.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the Hamilton Depression (17) and Montgommery and Asberg Depression Scales as research instruments in older depressed community residents. DESIGN: External validation against GMS/AGECAT case level in the recruitment of older community residents for an antidepressant trial. ANALYSES: Receiver operator curves were generated for each rating scale, using GMS/AGECAT case level in external criterion. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of both rating instruments were examined in the whole sample and age and gender subgroups. MADRS and HAM-D cut-off scores differentiating GMS/AGECAT cases from subcases were identified. RESULTS: HAM-D cut-off score of 16 and MADRS score of 21 were identified as differentiating case from sub-case. Diagnostic accuracy of both instruments was good, reflecting good sensitivity and specificity across both genders and sub-age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both scales performed well in this population. These scores provide researchers with externally validated and clinically relevant cut-off scores in designing trials in the management of older depressed community residents.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

The Depression-Arkansas scale: A validation study of a new brief depression scale in an HMO.

Recent trends in mental-health care have increased the need for practical depression instruments. The Depression-Arkansas (D-ARK), a brief, economical, multipurpose instrument, has been validated for assessing major depressive disorder (MDD) and depressive-symptom severity. Psychometric properties of the D-ARK were compared with standard depression scales (Beck Depression Inventory and Geriatric Depression Scale) among 294 adult and 193 senior primary-care patients, respectively, and 163 patients enrolled in cognitive-behavioral depression classes. The severity scale displayed adequate internal reliability (coefficient alpha =.81-.86), high correlation with the BDI-2 (r =.78-.83) and GDS (r =.75), and similar factor structure to the BDI-2. The D-ARK was calibrated against the BDI-2 and GDS, providing familiar severity category cutpoints with the new instrument. This study yields further data supporting the reliability, validity, and practical utility of the D-ARK.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

A partner-rating scale of postpartum depression: the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale - Partner (EPDS-P).

Partners could be useful as informants of postpartum women's depressive symptoms; however, currently no partner-ratings exist. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale - Partner (EPDS-P) is a 10-item measure adapted from the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). The EPDS-P is expected to converge with the EPDS and other measures of depressive symptoms and to demonstrate incremental validity in the prediction of depressive symptoms. 101 women and their partners completed multiple measures of depressive symptoms during the first six weeks postpartum. Initial results suggest adequate reliability and validity for the EPDS-P. The EPDS-P showed moderate convergent correlations with other depression measures. Longitudinal correlations showed a link between the two-week EPDS-P and the six-week EPDS. The EPDS-P demonstrated incremental validity over and above the EPDS. Results supported the use of the EPDS-P as a valid partner-rating scale. The findings confirm that partners of postpartum women are valuable resources when assessing depressive symptoms.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

A physiological coma scale: grading of coma by combined use of brain-stem trigeminal and auditory evoked potentials and the Glasgow Coma Scale.

Forty-five comatose patients were prospectively studied by means of clinical examination and evoked potentials. In each patient, clinical data included Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, age, pupillary response to light, corneal reflex, and eye movements. Neurophysiological evaluation was based on brain-stem trigeminal evoked potentials (BTEPs) and brain-stem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs). For each physiological test, a progressive grading system was designed. This system was based on the evaluation of central conduction times along the trigeminal and the auditory pathways within the brain-stem. The accuracy of the clinical and the neurophysiological indicants in predicting "favorable" or "unfavorable" outcome was assessed singly and in combination. Of the clinical indicants, the GCS provided the most accurate prognosis (80%). Similar results were provided by the BAEP and the BTEP, with significant improvement in the confidence of outcome prediction. No significant difference in the accuracy of outcome predictions could be found between combined clinical data and neurophysiological data. However, the combination of clinical and neurophysiological data markedly increased both the accuracy and the confidence of outcome prediction, reaching 86% correct predictions at the over 90% confidence level with only 2% false pessimistic errors. According to these findings, a clinical-physiological coma scale, the trigeminal-auditory Glasgow (Coma Scale) score (TAG score) was designed. The TAG score demonstrated the highest accuracy at each confidence level as compared to other single indicants. We concluded that the TAG score may improve the evaluation of deep comatose patients and assist the physician in the management of such patients.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Clinical use of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: is increased efficiency possible? A post hoc comparison of Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Maier and Bech subscales, Clinical Global Impression, and Symptom Checklist-90 scores.

BACKGROUND: The 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) is used as a semi-gold standard in research. In treatment guidelines, the HDRS measurements serve to determine response and remission and guide clinical decision making for nonresponders. However, its use in clinical practice is limited, possibly because the HDRS is time consuming. In addition, the multidimensional HDRS is criticized for not measuring a unidimensional aspect as depression severity. The Maier and the Bech, two 6-item severity subscales extracted from the HDRS, are relatively unknown. This paper investigates whether the measurements obtained with these subscales are comparable with the original HDRS measurements. METHODS: Data from 2 randomized controlled trials in 482 male and female patients, diagnosed with a major depression (with or without dysthymia) according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Revised Third Edition, of whom 219 participated in the trials, were reanalyzed. A standardized stepwise psychopharmacological treatment was compared with a combination of pharmacotherapy with Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in a psychiatric outpatient department. Outcome measures were internal consistency and concurrent validity of HDRS, Maier, Bech, Clinical Global Impression scales, and Symptom Checklist depression subscale. Effect sizes of HDRS, Maier, and Bech were used to compare measured treatment effects for the randomized subjects participating in the trials. Item Response Theory was used to obtain conversion tables for the HDRS, Maier, Bech, and Symptom Checklist depression subscale. RESULTS: We found moderate internal consistency (Cronbach alpha approximately 0.6-0.7) and high correlations of the Maier and Bech subscales with overall HDRS scores. Overall, there were no clinically relevant differences in effect sizes between Maier, Bech, and HDRS, although some differences were statistically significant. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed no difference between Maier and Bech to define remission but showed the Clinical Global Impression ratings to be unreliable. A cutoff < or =4 corresponded with an HDRS < or =7 criterion in both subscales. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, both Maier and Bech scales can be used as equivalents of the HDRS, but will be more efficient.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Correlations of visual analog scales with Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to search for correlations of scores on the visual analog scales (VAS) taken during the third week postpartum with scores on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) taken on approximately day 28 postpartum. METHODS: Thirty-four women filled out six visual analog scales on postpartum days 15-21 and took the EPDS at their 4-week postpartum visit to the clinic. Results were analyzed by simple linear regression and multiple backward stepwise regression. RESULTS: Responses to all six statements of the VAS correlated significantly with 4-week EPDS scores. Approximately 54% of the variability of 4-week EPDS scores can be predicted by the variability in VAS question 6. LIMITATIONS: Relatively small sample size is a moderately limiting factor of this study. CONCLUSION: Mood in the third week postpartum was predictive of EPDS score on postpartum day 28. Mood lability during the third week postpartum was a better predictor of EPDS score on day 28 than the other five measures, including feelings of sadness or anxiety. The EPDS may have potential use with an acceptable degree of accuracy earlier than the standard 4 weeks postpartum.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Derivation of a definition of remission on the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale corresponding to the definition of remission on the Hamilton rating scale for depression.

During the past decade the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) has been used with increasing frequency to measure outcome in antidepressant efficacy trials (AETs). In characterizing treatment outcome in AETs it is common to define treatment remission as a score below a predetermined cutoff score on the scale. Various cutoffs have been used to define remission on the MADRS. The goal of the present paper is to determine the cutoff on the MADRS that most closely corresponds to the cutoff most frequently used on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression to define remission. Three hundred and three psychiatric outpatients who were being treated for a DSM-IV major depressive episode were rated on the HRSD and the MADRS. A linear regression equation was computed to estimate MADRS scores from HRSD scores. After deriving the regression equation, we computed the MADRS score corresponding to an HRSD score of 7. We also examined the sensitivity, specificity and overall classification rate of the MADRS for identifying remission on the HRSD. Based on the equation from a linear regression analysis for the entire sample, a MADRS score of </=11 would correspond to a score of </=7 on the HRSD. We repeated the analysis after excluding the more severely depressed patients who currently met criteria for MDD, and based on the equation from this regression analysis a MADRS score of </=10 would correspond to a score of </=7 on the HRSD. In a complementary analysis, we examined the sensitivity, specificity and overall classification rate of the MADRS at different cutoff points for identifying remission, and found that a cutoff of </=10 maximized the level of agreement with the HRSD definition of remission. In conclusion, the regression equation relating HRSD and MADRS scores is dependent, in part, on the range and severity of scores in the sample. To facilitate comparisons of studies using the HRSD and MADRS our results suggest that a cutoff of 10 on the MADRS is equivalent to the HRSD cutoff of 7.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Assessing delirium in cancer patients: the Italian versions of the Delirium Rating Scale and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale.

To validate the Italian versions of the Delirium Rating Scale (DRS) and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), 105 cancer patients consecutively referred for neurological or psychiatric consultation for mental status change were evaluated using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), the DRS, the MDAS, and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). According to the CAM criteria and clinical examination, 66 patients were delirious, and 39 received diagnoses other than delirium. The DRS and the MDAS scores significantly distinguished delirious from non-delirious patients. The MDAS and the DRS were mutually correlated. When using the proposed cut-off scores for the two scales, the MDAS had higher specificity (94%) but lower sensitivity (68%) than the DRS (sensitivity = 95%, specificity = 61% for DRS cut-off 10; sensitivity = 80%, specificity = 76%, DRS cut-off 12). The MMSE showed high sensitivity (96%) and very low specificity (38%). Exploratory factor analysis of the DRS and the MDAS suggested a three-factor and two-factor structure, respectively. Both instruments in their Italian version proved to be useful for the assessment of delirium among cancer patients. Further research is needed to examine the use of the DRS and the MDAS in other clinical contexts.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Patient- and family-rated scale for bipolar disorder symptoms: Internal State Scale.

The monitoring of patients, by themselves and their caregivers, is very important in the prophylaxis of bipolar disorder. This study aimed to develop a Chinese-language version of an instrument for assessment of manic and depressive symptoms by patients and their families. Fifty-eight inpatients and outpatients with a DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) diagnosis of bipolar disorder were recruited. All subjects underwent clinical psychopathologic assessment by experienced psychiatrists using the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). At the same time, each patient and key family members filled out the Chinese-language version of the Internal State Scale (ISS) for monitoring mental symptoms. Patients were examined a second time if they had entered remission or a new episode of the opposite polarity. The ISS was divided into two subscales, of well-being/activation and of irritability. Patients' well-being/activation and irritability subscales were significantly correlated with YMRS scores and the well-being/activation subscale was also significantly correlated with the HDRS score. Family members' irritability subscales were significantly correlated with HDRS scores only. The reliability and constructive validity of the ISS was good in both patients with bipolar disorder and their families.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

The relative sensitivity of the Clinical Global Impressions Scale and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale in antipsychotic drug trials.

Although the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) are both frequently used in drug trials for schizophrenia, their relative sensitivity in detecting differences between antipsychotics has not yet been examined. We therefore reanalyzed original patient data from all four pivotal, randomized controlled studies (n = 1205) that compared amisulpride with haloperidol in patients with schizophrenia. The sensitivity of the BPRS vs the CGI-improvement and the CGI-severity scales in detecting between-drug differences was estimated by calculating effect sizes and their 95% confidence intervals for both continuous (standardized mean differences) and dichotomous outcomes (odds ratios). The primary end points were the last observation carried forward results at study end points pooling all studies, but the results of the observed cases at different study weeks and the results of the single studies were also examined. The effect sizes derived from the BPRS and from the CGI were similar. When the single studies were pooled, all outcomes analyzed showed a statistically significant superiority of amisulpride compared to haloperidol as early as 2 weeks after initiation of treatment. The CGI may be as sensitive as the BPRS in detecting efficacy differences between antipsychotic drugs, although specific studies with truly independent ratings would be needed for confirmation. The fact that it takes only 1-2 min to fill in the CGI justifies its use in addition to more specific scales in drug trials for schizophrenia. Further development and evaluation of the CGI is warranted.

Analysis of Variance↗