|
|
||||||||
From the Eleanor and Lou Gehrig MDA/ALS Research Center (J.M., P.K., P.H.G., H.M.), Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, and Department of Biostatistics (G.L., R.B.), Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY; and Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences (S.A.), Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Jacqueline Montes, Eleanor and Lou Gehrig MDA/ALS Research Center, Columbia University, 710 West 168th Street, New York, NY 10032; e-mail: jm598{at}columbia.edu
We evaluated the reliability and sensitivity to change over time of a newly developed self-administered version of the ALS functional rating scale-revised (ALSFRS-R) in 60 consecutive patients from an ALS clinic. The self-administered ALSFRS-R showed excellent reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.93, 95% CI: 088 to 0.96) and similar sensitivity to change over time vs the standard evaluator-administered ALSFRS-R.
Additional material related to this article can be found on the Neurology Web site. Go to www.neurology.org and scroll down the Table of Contents for the October 10 issue to find the title link for this article.
Supported by funds from MDA Wings Over Wall Street.
Disclosure: The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Received March 20, 2006. Accepted in final form June 6, 2006.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. J. Sorenson What is next in ALS clinical trials? Neurology, August 21, 2007; 69(8): 719 - 720. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |