Patterns of outcome measurement in Parkinson's disease clinical trials

被引:30
作者
Mitchell, SL
Harper, DW
Lau, A
Bhalla, R
机构
[1] Univ Ottawa, Ottawa Hosp, Leob Hlth Res Inst, Div Geriatr Med, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
[2] Univ Ottawa, Ottawa Hosp, Leob Hlth Res Inst, Clin Epidemiol Unit, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
关键词
Parkinson's disease; outcome; measurement; endpoint; scales; clinical trials;
D O I
10.1159/000026244
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
The study examines the pattern of use and clinimetric properties of clinical endpoints used in randomized trials for Parkinson's disease (PD). Randomized drug trials for PD were identified through a Medline search conducted from January 1966 until August 1998. The endpoints used in these trials were abstracted. Reports examining the clinimetric properties of the disease-specific scales used in these trials were also abstracted. Data regarding the consistency, accuracy, discrimination and feasibility of scales used in at least 10% of trials were determined. One hundred and thirty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria; 70.8% of trials used some clinical scale for PD as an endpoint. The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) was the most commonly used scale (32.8%). Factors independently associated with the use of the UPDRS included: the study location in the US, mean age of subjects over 62.7 years and publication after 1994. The UPDRS was more thoroughly stud led and superior in most clinimetric domains compared to scales developed earlier. Few studies included generic health status (2.9%) or cognitive measures (16.8%) as secondary endpoints. There have been definite improvements in the area of disease-specific measurement in PD trials since the introduction of the UPDRS. The results of studies that used instruments with poor or unreported clinimetric properties should be critically interpreted. Copyright (C) 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel.
引用
收藏
页码:100 / 108
页数:9
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   VALUE AND APPROPRIATE USE OF RATING-SCALES AND APPARATIVE MEASUREMENTS IN QUANTIFICATION OF DISABILITY IN PARKINSONS-DISEASE [J].
BAAS, H ;
STECKER, K ;
FISCHER, PA .
JOURNAL OF NEURAL TRANSMISSION-PARKINSONS DISEASE AND DEMENTIA SECTION, 1993, 5 (01) :45-61
[2]  
Barbeau A, 1981, J Neurol Sci, V51, P311
[3]   THE SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE - DEVELOPMENT AND FINAL REVISION OF A HEALTH-STATUS MEASURE [J].
BERGNER, M ;
BOBBITT, RA ;
CARTER, WB ;
GILSON, BS .
MEDICAL CARE, 1981, 19 (08) :787-805
[4]  
Boers M, 1998, J RHEUMATOL, V25, P198
[5]   A METHOD FOR EVALUATING DISABILITY IN PATIENTS WITH PARKINSONS-DISEASE [J].
CANTER, GJ ;
DELATORRE, R ;
MIER, M .
JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISEASE, 1961, 133 (02) :143-147
[6]  
Cranney A, 1997, J RHEUMATOL, V24, P1222
[7]   EVALUATING THE EVALUATIONS - OR HOW TO WEIGH THE SCALES OF PARKINSONIAN DISABILITY [J].
DIAMOND, SG ;
MARKHAM, CH .
NEUROLOGY, 1983, 33 (08) :1098-1099
[8]   DOUBLE-BLIND COMPARISON OF LEVODOPA, MADOPA, AND SINEMET IN PARKINSON DISEASE [J].
DIAMOND, SG ;
MARKHAM, CH ;
TRECIOKAS, LJ .
ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY, 1978, 3 (03) :267-272
[9]  
DUVOISIN RC, 1971, MONOMINES NOYAUX GRI
[10]  
*EUR GROUP, 1990, HLTH POLICY, V12, P199