Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparison of five stroke scales with measures of disability, handicap, and quality of life.

Open access
De Haan, R, Horn, J, Limburg, M, Van Der Meulen, J, Bossuyt, P·1993·Stroke

Abstract

Recently much debate has arisen on the appropriateness of assessing stroke outcomes with stroke impairment scales. Our purpose was to study the relationship between long-term impairments and functional outcomes in terms of disability, handicap, and quality of life. We studied 87 patients who had a stroke 6 months earlier. Impairments were scored on five stroke scales: the Orgogozo Scale, the National Institutes of Health scale, the Canadian Neurological Scale, the Mathew scale, and the Scandinavian Stroke Scale. Disability was assessed with the Barthel Index, handicap with the Rankin scale, and quality of life with the Sickness Impact Profile. The linear relationship between stroke scales and functional scales was assessed with correlation coefficients. We used regression analyses to explain functional health. The stroke scales were highly related to one another (range, r = -.85 to .92). The correlation between stroke scales and functional scales was < .70 and decreased from Barthel (mean r2 = 47.5%) to Rankin (mean r2 = 36.5%) to Sickness Impact Profile (mean r2 = 33%). Stroke scales were rather poorly correlated with patients' psychosocial conditions (mean r2 = 11.5%). Functional health status was mainly related to leg power and orientation. The standardized stroke scale weights of the explanatory items were lower than their standardized regression weights. Stroke scales only partly explain functional health. The impact of impairments on functional outcomes seems to be underestimated by the stroke scale weights. The correlation patterns give empirical support to the hierarchical structure of the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps.

Overview

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.24.8.1178

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
De Haan, R., Horn, J., Limburg, M., Van Der Meulen, J., & Bossuyt, P.
Venue
Stroke
Published
1993-08
Volume
24
Issue
8
Pages
1178-1181
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2018035727
Cited by
264
References
1
FWCI
6.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison of five stroke scales with measures of disability, handicap, and quality of life. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.24.8.1178
The paper
De Haan, R., Horn, J., Limburg, M., Van Der Meulen, J., & Bossuyt, P. (1993). A comparison of five stroke scales with measures of disability, handicap, and quality of life. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.24.8.1178

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.