The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A comparison of the Glasgow Coma Scale and the Reaction Level Scale (RLS85)
Abstract
✓ The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and the Reaction Level Scale (RLS85) were compared for rating neurosurgical patients in regard to ranking order of deficit severity, interobserver variability, and coverage for relevant factors. Four physicians, four registered nurses, and four assistant nurses performed 72 pairwise ratings on 47 neurosurgical patients. The rank correlation between the GCS sum score and the RLS85 was −0.94, suggesting the same ranking order of severity and indicating that the underlying concepts of somnolence, delirium, and motor responses in coma are evaluated in the same way. By the sign test, the RLS85 was shown to have better interobserver agreement than the GCS sum score and the eye-motor-verbal (EMV) profile. The interobserver grading disagreements in both scales were distributed over the entire range of responsiveness, and for the GCS sum score they were slanted to combined segments 9 to 15. The RLS85 showed full coverage of relevant factors, while 43 (60%) of the 72 test occasions in the GCS sum score and the EMV profiles showed untestable features, most often because of patient intubation. The pseudoscore (that is, the choice of value given to untestable features) affects interobserver agreement as well as the estimated overall patient responsiveness in the GCS sum score. Assessment by the order of applying the scales showed a significant effect on the GCS eye-opening scale (p = 0.01) and the GCS sum score (p = 0.03), indicating a sensitivity to environmental stimuli unrelated to the patient's status. This study demonstrates that basically the same information as that found in the separate eye, motor, and verbal scales of the GCS can be combined directly into the RLS85, which has better interobserver agreement and better coverage than the GCS sum score.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Validation of a new coma scale: The FOUR score
Wijdicks, E. F. M., Bamlet, W. R., Maramattom, B. V., Manno, E. M., & McClelland, R. L. (2005) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.20611 · Cited by 1,122
Diagnostic Criteria, Clinical Features, and Incidence of Thyroid Storm Based on Nationwide Surveys
Akamizu, T., Satoh, T., Isozaki, O., Suzuki, A., Wakino, S., Iburi, T., Tsuboi, K., Monden, T., Kouki, T., Otani, H., et al. (2012) · Thyroid® · doi:10.1089/thy.2011.0334 · Cited by 469
Cortical processing of noxious somatosensory stimuli in the persistent vegetative state
Laureys, S., Faymonville, M. E., Peigneux, P., Damas, P., Lambermont, B., Del Fiore, G., Degueldre, C., Aerts, J., Luxen, A., Franck, G., et al. (2002) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1236 · Cited by 432
Perception of pain in the minimally conscious state with PET activation: an observational study
Boly, M., Faymonville, M.-E., Schnakers, C., Peigneux, P., Lambermont, B., Phillips, C., Lancellotti, P., Luxen, A., Lamy, M., Moonen, G., et al. (2008) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(08)70219-9 · Cited by 423
Interrater reliability of Glasgow Coma Scale scores in the emergency department
Gill, M. R., Reiley, D. G., & Green, S. M. (2004) · Annals of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0196-0644(03)00814-x · Cited by 279
Metadata
- Authors
- Starmark, J.-E., Stålhammar, D., Holmgren, E., & Rosander, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurosurgery
- Published
- 1988-11
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 699-706
- ISSN
- 0022-3085 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2064437704
- Cited by
- 202
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.17
- 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: A comparison of the Glasgow Coma Scale and the Reaction Level Scale (RLS85). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3171/jns.1988.69.5.0699
- The paper
- Starmark, J.-E., Stålhammar, D., Holmgren, E., & Rosander, B. (1988). A comparison of the Glasgow Coma Scale and the Reaction Level Scale (RLS85). Journal of Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1988.69.5.0699
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.