Structured Interviews for the Glasgow Outcome Scale and the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale: Guidelines for Their Use
Abstract
The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) is the most widely used outcome measure after traumatic brain injury, but it is increasingly recognized to have important limitations. It is proposed that shortcomings of the GOS can be addressed by adopting a standard format for the interview used to assign outcome. A set of guidelines are outlined that are directed at the main problems encountered in applying the GOS. The guidelines cover the general principles underlying the use of the GOS and common practical problems of applying the scale. Structured interview schedules are described for both the five-point GOS and an extended eight-point GOS (GOSE). An interrater reliability study of the structured interviews for the GOS and GOSE yielded weighted kappa values of 0.89 and 0.85, respectively. It is concluded that assessment of the GOS using a standard format with a written protocol is practical and reliable.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Uncertainty remains as to how early TBI exposure is related to a broader set of specific medical and social functioning outcomes in adulthood, such as premature mortality, disability pension, and educational attainment.
“Nevertheless, uncertainty remains as to how early TBI exposure is related to a broader set of specific medical and social functioning outcomes in adulthood [10,21,22], such as premature mortality, disability pension, and educational attainment.”
Similar results have been reported in studies examining global disability indices, such as the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE).
“Similar results have been reported in studies examining global disability indices [10], such as the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) [21].”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 22 · Cited by 2,386
- Authors
- WILSON, J. T. L., PETTIGREW, L. E. L., & TEASDALE, G. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurotrauma
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1998-08
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 573-585
- ISSN
- 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-9042
- OpenAlex
- W1972491904
- Cited by
- 2,386
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 100 · 2025: 116 · 2024: 134 · 2023: 142 · 2022: 147 · 2021: 127 · 2020: 150 · 2019: 133 · 2018: 107 · 2017: 115 · 2016: 94 · 2015: 92 · 2014: 94 · 2013: 91 · 2012: 90
- FWCI
- 9.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Neurotrauma (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
- Keywords
- Glasgow Outcome Scale, Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended, traumatic brain injury, outcome measurement, inter-rater reliability
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Disability Evaluation, Female, Craniocerebral Trauma, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Reference Values, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation, Glasgow Coma Scale, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Practice Guidelines as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review