Disability after encephalitis: Development and validation of a new outcome score
Bulletin of the World Health Organization, ISSN: 0042-9686, Vol: 88, Issue: 8, Page: 584-592
2010
- 53Citations
- 72Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting 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
- Citations53
- Citation Indexes50
- 50
- CrossRef43
- Policy Citations3
- Policy Citation3
- Captures72
- Readers72
- 59
- 10
- Mentions1
- References1
- Wikipedia1
Article Description
Objective: To develop a simple tool for assessing the severity of disability resulting from Japanese encephalitis and whether, as a result, a child is likely to be dependent. Methods: A new outcome score based on a 15-item questionnaire was developed after a literature review, examination of current assessment tools, discussion with experts and a pilot study. The score was used to evaluate 100 children in Malaysia (56 Japanese encephalitis patients, 2 patients with encephalitis of unknown etiology and 42 controls) and 95 in India (36 Japanese encephalitis patients, 41 patients with encephalitis of unknown etiology and 18 controls). Inter-and intra-observer variability in the outcome score was determined and the score was compared with full clinical assessment. Findings: There was good inter-observer agreement on using the new score to identify likely dependency (K = 0.942 for Malaysian children; K = 0.786 for Indian children) and good intra-observer agreement (K = 1.000 and 0.902, respectively). In addition, agreement between the new score and clinical assessment was also good (K = 0.906 and 0.762, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of the new score for identifying children likely to be dependent were 100% and 98.4% in Malaysia and 100% and 93.8% in India. Positive and negative predictive values were 84.2% and 100% in Malaysia and 65.6% and 100% in India. Conclusion: The new tool for assessing disability in children after Japanese encephalitis was simple to use and scores correlated well with clinical assessment.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=77955995035&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/blt.09.071357; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20680123; http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/88/8/09-071357.pdf; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2908971/pdf/BLT.09.071357.pdf
WHO Press
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know