4.6 Article

Recommendations for the Use of Common Outcome Measures in Traumatic Brain Injury Research

期刊

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.06.033

关键词

Outcome assessment; health care; Brain injuries; Neurobehavioral manifestations; Research; Rehabilitation

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke)
  2. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
  3. U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)
  4. U.S. Department of Education/National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article summarizes the selection of outcome measures by the interagency Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Outcomes Workgroup to address primary clinical research objectives, including documentation of the natural course of recovery from TBI, prediction of later outcome, measurement of treatment effects, and comparison of outcomes across studies. Consistent with other Common Data Elements Workgroups, the TBI Outcomes Workgroup adopted the standard 3-tier system in its selection of measures. In the first tier, core measures included valid, robust, and widely applicable outcome measures with proven utility in TBI from each identified domain, including global level of function, neuropsychological impairment, psychological status, TBI-related symptoms, executive functions, cognitive and physical activity limitations, social role participation, and perceived health-related quality of life. In the second tier, supplemental measures were recommended for consideration in TBI research focusing on specific topics or populations. In the third tier, emerging measures included important instruments currently under development, in the process of validation, or nearing the point of published findings that have significant potential to be superior to some older (legacy) measures in the core and supplemental lists and may eventually replace them as evidence for their utility emerges.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据