4.6 Article

Detection and Interpretation of Impossible and Improbable Coma Recovery Scale-Revised Scores

Journal

ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION
Volume 97, Issue 8, Pages 1295-1300

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.02.009

Keywords

Brain injuries; Consciousness disorders; Outcome assessment (health care); Rehabilitation

Funding

  1. National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research, Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Community Living [90DP0039-01-00]
  2. James S. McDonnell Foundation
  3. Harvard Catalyst \ The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Research Resources)
  4. Harvard Catalyst \ The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health) [UL1 TR001102]
  5. Harvard University and its affiliated academic health care centers
  6. Belgian American Educational Foundation
  7. Wallonie Bruxelles International Concerted Research Action
  8. Belgian Funds for Scientific Research, European Commission
  9. European Foundation for Biomedical Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine the frequency with which specific Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) subscale scores co-occur as a means of providing clinicians and researchers with an empirical method of assessing CRS-R data quality. Design: We retrospectively analyzed CRS-R subscale scores in hospital inpatients diagnosed with disorders of consciousness (DOCs) to identify impossible and improbable subscore combinations as a means of detecting inaccurate and unusual scores. Impossible subscore combinations were based on violations of CRS-R scoring guidelines. To determine improbable subscore combinations, we relied on the Mahalanobis distance, which detects outliers within a distribution of scores. Subscore pairs that were not observed at all in the database (ie, frequency of occurrence = 0%) were also considered improbable. Setting: Specialized DOC program and university hospital. Participants: Patients diagnosed with DOCs (N=1190; coma: n=76, vegetative state: n=464, minimally conscious state: n=586, emerged from minimally conscious state: n=64; 794 men; mean age, 43 +/- 20y; traumatic etiology: n=747; time postinjury, 162 +/- 568d). Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure: Impossible and improbable CRS-R subscore combinations. Results: Of the 1190 CRS-R profiles analyzed, 4.7% were excluded because they met scoring criteria for impossible co-occurrence. Among the 1137 remaining profiles, 12.2% (41/336) of possible subscore combinations were classified as improbable. Conclusions: Clinicians and researchers should take steps to ensure the accuracy of CRS-R scores. To minimize the risk of diagnostic error and erroneous research findings, we have identified 9 impossible and 36 improbable CRS-R subscore combinations. The presence of any one of these subscore combinations should trigger additional data quality review. (C) 2016 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available