Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of a disease-specific muscular impairment rating scale in myotonic dystrophy

Mathieu, J., Boivin, H., Meunier, D., Gaudreault, M., Bégin, P.·2001·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To document the intra/interrater reliability and the construct validity of the Muscular Impairment Rating Scale (MIRS) in assessing patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1). The MIRS is a ordinal five-point rating scale, established in accordance with the clinically recognized distal to proximal progression of the muscular involvement in DM1, based partly on a manual muscle testing (MMT) of 11 muscle groups. METHODS: To assess the reliability of the MIRS, 55 patients with DM1 were examined by three different observers, one of them evaluating each patient twice. Intra- and interobserver reliability of the MIRS was measured using Cohen's weighted kappa. To assess the construct validity of the MIRS, correlations were made with the Functional Status Index (FSI) and eight timed functional tasks. RESULTS: The intraobserver reliability of the MIRS was excellent (weighted kappa = 0.84), and the interobserver reliability was interpreted as a substantial agreement (weighted kappa = 0.77 to 0.79). The correlation coefficients between MMT scores and MIRS grades were all highly significant (r(s) = -0.81 to -0.88, p < 0.001). The FSI showed a significant progressive increase of the total median dependence score in activities of daily living from 0 in MIRS grade 1 to 39 in MIRS grade 5 (p < 0.001). The time needed to perform the eight functional tasks was also found to significantly increase in relation with the progression of the MIRS grades. CONCLUSION: The MIRS is a quick, simple, and reliable measurement of muscular impairment in DM1. The FSI questionnaire and the timed motor activities supported its construct validity. The MIRS is useful to monitor major stages of DM1 progression, to study the natural history of the disease, and to identify homogeneous groups of patients for clinical trials.

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 · 10.1212/wnl.56.3.336

Cites

11 of 11 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 11 references

Cited by

See all 384

Metadata

Authors
Mathieu, J., Boivin, H., Meunier, D., Gaudreault, M., & Bégin, P.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2001-02-13
Volume
56
Issue
3
Pages
336-340
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2068816428
Cited by
384
References
11
FWCI
1.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Assessment of a disease-specific muscular impairment rating scale in myotonic dystrophy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.56.3.336
The paper
Mathieu, J., Boivin, H., Meunier, D., Gaudreault, M., & Bégin, P. (2001). Assessment of a disease-specific muscular impairment rating scale in myotonic dystrophy. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.56.3.336

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.