English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/214117
Share/Impact:
Statistics
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:

Title

Extensive validation study of the Parkinson's Disease Composite Scale

AuthorsMartinez‐Martin, P.; Radicati, F. G.; Rodriguez Blazquez, C.; Wetmore, J.; Kovacs, N.; Ray Chaudhuri, K.; Stocchi, F.
KeywordsDimensionality
Inter‐rater reliability
Parkinson's disease
Parkinson's Disease Composite Scale
Validation
Issue DateOct-2019
PublisherJohn Wiley & Sons
CitationEuropean Journal of Neurology 26(10): 1281-1288 (2019)
Abstract[Background and purpose]: A composite instrument able to rapidly and reliably assess the most relevant motor and non‐motor afflictions suffered by Parkinson's disease (PD ) patients in a real world clinic setting is an unmet need. The recently validated PD Composite Scale (PDCS ) was designed to fulfil this gap as a quick, comprehensive PD assessment. The objective of this study was extensive evaluation of the PDCS 's clinimetric properties using a large international sample.
[Methods]: This was a cross‐sectional study in which the PDCS , the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale and the Clinical Impression of Severity Index for PD were applied. Basic clinimetric attributes of the PDCS were analysed.
[Results]: In total, 776 PD patients were included. The PDCS total score showed negligible floor and ceiling effects. Three factors (54.5% of the variance) were identified: factor 1 included motor impairment, fluctuations and disability; factor 2, non‐motor symptoms; and factor 3, tremor and complications of therapy. Cronbach's alpha was from 0.66 to 0.79. Inter‐rater reliability showed weighted kappa values from 0.79 to 0.98 for items and intraclass correlation coefficient values from 0.95 (Disability) to 0.99 (Motor and total score). The Bland–Altmann method, however, showed irregular concordance. PDCS standard error of measurement and convergent validity with equivalent constructs of other measures were satisfactory (≥0.70). PDCS scores significantly differed by Hoehn and Yahr stage.
[Conclusion]: Overall, in line with previous findings, the PDCS is a feasible, acceptable, valid, reliable and precise instrument for quickly and comprehensively assessing PD patients.
Publisher version (URL)http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ene.13976
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/214117
DOI10.1111/ene.13976
ISSN1351-5101
E-ISSN1468-1331
Appears in Collections:(IBIS) Artículos
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
accesoRestringido.pdf15,38 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record
Review this work
 

Related articles:


WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.