Cited by 6,512Acute Ischemic Stroke ManagementStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryReliability and Agreement in Measurement

Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients

Open access
van Swieten, J C, Koudstaal, P J, Visser, M C, Schouten, H J, van Gijn, J·1988·Stroke

Abstract

Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients was investigated in a group of 10 senior neurologists and 24 residents from two centers. One hundred patients were separately interviewed by two physicians in different combinations. The degree of handicap was recorded by each observer on the modified Rankin scale, which has six grades (0-5). The agreement rates were corrected for chance (kappa statistics). Both physicians agreed on the degree of handicap in 65 patients; they differed by one grade in 32 patients and by two grades in 3 patients. Kappa for all pairwise observations was 0.56; the value for weighted kappa (with quadratic disagreement weights) was 0.91. Our results confirm the value of the modified Rankin scale in the assessment of handicap in stroke patients; nevertheless, further improvements are possible.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.str.19.5.604

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • All measures used in the research were standardized and validated for stroke population and adapted to Spanish language.

    “All measures used in the research were standardized and validated for stroke population and adapted to Spanish language [20–39].”

    From Early Occupational Therapy Intervention post-stroke (EOTIPS): A randomized controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Abstract and Discussion report satisfactory interobserver agreement for the modified Rankin scale in stroke patients, supporting its use as a stroke measure. The paper does not establish that all measures in the citing research were standardized and validated, or that they were adapted to Spanish. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Follow-up information was obtained at regular intervals (4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months) after symptom onset; neurological status was assessed with the modified Rankin scale (mRS).

    “Follow-up information was obtained at regular intervals (4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months) after symptom onset; neurological status was assessed with the modified Rankin scale (mRS).12”

    From Treatment and prognostic factors for long-term outcome in patients with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis: an observational cohort study (2013) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Subjects and Methods section says the researchers used the modified Rankin scale to assess handicap in stroke patients. It does not report follow-up at 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24 months; its patients were assessed within the first week or within five months after stroke. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Neurological outcome was assessed with the modified Rankin scale (MRS) and mini-mental state examination (MMSE).

    “Neurological outcome was assessed with the modified Rankin scale (MRS)10 and mini-mental state examination (MMSE).11”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. UK-TIA Study Group: The UK-TIA aspirin trial: Interim results. Br Med J 1988;296:316-320

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Swieten, J. C., Koudstaal, P. J., Visser, M. C., Schouten, H. J., & van Gijn, J.
Affiliations
  • University Department of Neurology, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Utrecht University (NL)
Venue
Stroke
Published
1988-05
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
604-607
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W1969661146
Cited by
6,512
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 337 · 2025: 377 · 2024: 382 · 2023: 322 · 2022: 445 · 2021: 408 · 2020: 360 · 2019: 285 · 2018: 266 · 2017: 291 · 2016: 284 · 2015: 268 · 2014: 238 · 2013: 254 · 2012: 244
FWCI
9.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Stroke (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
functional disability assessment, interobserver agreement, modified Rankin Scale, neurologists, medical residents, kappa statistic, weighted kappa
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Cerebrovascular Disorders, Humans, Neurologic Examination, Prognosis

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