Self-assessment reliability in multiple sclerosis: the role of socio-demographic, clinical, and quality of life aspects
Neurological Sciences, ISSN: 1590-3478, Vol: 40, Issue: 3, Page: 617-620
2019
- 15Citations
- 37Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations15
- Citation Indexes15
- 15
- CrossRef3
- Captures37
- Readers37
- 37
Article Description
Introduction: Several multiple sclerosis studies matching self- and physician assessment of disease course and disability show moderate and high agreement respectively. However, the role played by socio-demographic, clinical, and quality of life (QoL) factors was not much investigated. The study aims at exploring how self-/physician agreement could depend on these variables. Materials and methods: Participants were asked to report own disease course and disability according to preset categories. Kappa-value and confidence interval (CI) for disease course and two-way random interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and CI for disability were calculated to evaluate self-/physician agreement. Χ was applied to examine whether other factors (gender, age, education, civil status, disease duration, fatigue, quality of life) had systematic effects. Results: Data analysis on 203 participants indicated fair agreement (Kappa-value = 0.30; 95% CI 0.23–0.38) and no dependency on the categories of each variable for disease course. Satisfactory correlation was found for disability (ICC = 0.74; 95% IC 0.67–0.80), good agreement was found for almost all variable categories, and significant differences were observed for education (better agreement for higher levels), disease duration, fatigue and QoL (better agreement for worse conditions). Discussion: Results seem to suggest that higher education and worse clinical and QoL conditions could engage the patient in developing more disease awareness and realistic self-perception and self-evaluation.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85054645472&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10072-018-3589-6; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30291467; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10072-018-3589-6; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10072-018-3589-6; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10072-018-3589-6
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know