Cited by 242Acute Ischemic Stroke ManagementStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryDelphi Technique in Research

Contemporary Outcome Measures in Acute Stroke Research: Choice of Primary Outcome Measure

Lees, Kennedy R., Bath, Philip M.W., Schellinger, Peter D., Kerr, Daniel M., Fulton, Rachael, Hacke, Werner, Matchar, David, Sehra, Ruchir +1 more·2012·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose—: The diversity of available outcome measures for acute stroke trials is challenging and implies that the scales may be imperfect. To assist researchers planning trials and to aid interpretation, this article reviews and makes recommendations on the available choices of scales. The aim is to identify an approach that will be universally accepted and that should be included in most acute trials, without seeking to restrict options for special circumstances. Methods—: The article considers outcome measures that have been widely used or are currently advised. It examines desirable properties for outcome measures such as validity, relevance, responsiveness, statistical properties, availability of training, cultural and language issues, resistance to comorbidity, as well as potential weaknesses. Tracking and agreement among outcomes are covered. Results—: Typical ranges of scores for the common scales are described, along with their statistical properties, which in turn influence optimal analytic techniques. The timing of recovery on scores and usual practice in trial design are considered. Conclusions—: The preferred outcome measure for acute trials is the modified Rankin Scale, assessed at 3 months after stroke onset or later. The interview should be conducted by a certified rater and should involve both the patient and any relevant caregiver. Incremental benefits at any level of the modified Rankin Scale may be acceptable. The modified Rankin Scale is imperfect but should be retained in its present form for comparability with existing treatment comparisons. No second measure should be required, but correlations with supporting scales may be used to confirm consistency in direction of effects on other measures.

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/strokeaha.111.641423

Cites

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?

  • Common outcome scales in acute stroke trials, such as the modified Rankin Scale and Barthel Index, are ordered categorical or pseudocontinuous in nature.

    “Common outcome scales in acute stroke trials such as the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and Barthel Index 1 are ordered categorical or pseudocontinuous in nature”

    From Statistical Analysis of the Primary Outcome in Acute Stroke Trials (2012) · cites this paper as [1]

    In the section beginning “The 2 articles in this issue,” our copy describes the modified Rankin Scale as an ordinal scale and discusses using its full range rather than dichotomizing it. It does not mention the Barthel Index or characterize it as pseudocontinuous, so that part of the attributed claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 58 · Cited by 242

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Lees KR, Bath PM, Schellinger PD, Kerr DM, Fulton R, Hacke W, et al, and for the European Stroke Organisation Outcomes Working Group. Contemporary outcome measures in acute stroke research: choice of primary outcome measure. Stroke. 2012;43:1163-1170.
  2. Tilley B, Marler J, Geller N, Lu M, Legler J, Brott T, et al. Use of a global test for multiple outcomes in stroke trials with application to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke tPA trial. Stroke. 1996;27: 2136-2142.
  3. Tilley BC, Huang P, O'Brien, PC. Global assessment variables. In: D'Agostino RB, Sullivan L, Massaro J, eds. Wiley Encyclopedia of Clinical Trials. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2007.
  4. New PW, Buchbinder R. Critical appraisal and review of the Rankin Scale and its derivatives. Neuroepidemiology. 2006;26:4 -15.
  5. NINDS t-PS Stroke Study Group. Generalized efficacy of tPA for acute stroke: sub-group analyses of the NINDS tPA Stroke Trial. Stroke. 1997; 28:2119 -2125.
  6. O'Brien PC. Procedures for comparing samples with multiple endpoints. Biometrics. 1984;40:1079 -1087.
  7. Huang P, Goetz CG, Woolson R, Tilley BC, Kerr D, Palesch Y, et al. for The Parkinson Study Group. Using global statistical tests in long term Parkinson's disease clinical trials. Mov Disord. 2009;24:1732-1739.
  8. Marler JR, Tilley BC, Lu M, Brott TG, Lyden PC, Grotta JC, et al. for the NINDS rtPA Stroke Study Group. Early stroke treatment associated with better outcome. Neurology. 2000;55:1649 -1655.
  9. The ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA Study Group Investigators. Association of outcome with early stroke treatment: pooled analysis of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rtPA stroke trials. Lancet. 2004;363: 768 -774.
  10. Lees KR, Bluhmki E, von Kummer R, Brott TG, Toni D, Grotta JC, et al. for the ECASS, ATLANTIS, NINDS, and EPITHET rt-PA Study Group Investigators. Time to treatment with intravenous alteplase and outcome in stroke: an updated pooled analysis of ECASS, ATLANTIS, NINDS, and EPITHET trials. Lancet. 2010;375:1695-1703.
  11. Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60: II. Prognosis. Scot Med J. 1957;2:200 -215.
  12. Candelise L, Pinardi G, Aritzu E, Musicco M. Telephone interview for stroke outcome assessment. Cerebrovasc Dis. 1994;4:341-343.
  13. Goetz CG, Fahn S, Martinez-Martin P, Poewe W, Sampaio C, Stebbins GT, et al. Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale (MDS-UPDRS): process, format, and clinimetric testing plan. Mov Disord. 2007;22:41-47.

Authors
Lees, K. R., Bath, P. M. W., Schellinger, P. D., Kerr, D. M., Fulton, R., Hacke, W., Matchar, D., Sehra, R., & Toni, D.
Affiliations
Western Infirmary (GB)
Venue
Stroke
Published
2012-04
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
1163-1170
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2054690731
Cited by
242
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 4
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Stroke (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0611-10003)
  • European Stroke Organisation
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
Keywords
acute stroke, outcome measures, modified Rankin Scale, stroke outcome assessment, trial design, scale validity, responsiveness, comorbidities, outcome monitoring, patient-reported outcomes, caregiver involvement, rater training
MeSH terms
Humans, Stroke

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