↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of patients with disorder of consciousness: do different Coma Recovery Scale scoring correlate with different settings?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of patients with disorder of consciousness: do different Coma Recovery Scale scoring correlate with different settings?
Published in
Journal of Neurology, September 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00415-014-7478-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Davide Sattin, Ambra M. Giovannetti, Francesca Ciaraffa, Venusia Covelli, Anna Bersano, Anna Nigri, Stefania Ferraro, Ludovico Minati, Davide Rossi, Dunja Duran, Eugenio Parati, Matilde Leonardi

Abstract

Differential diagnosis between Vegetative State and Minimally Conscious State is a challenging task that requires specific assessment scales, involvement of expert neuropsychologists or physicians and use of tailored stimuli for eliciting behavioural responses. Although misdiagnosis rate as high as 40% has been reported, no clear guidelines are available in literature on the optimal setting for assessment. The present study aims to analyse score differences in behavioural assessments of persons with disorders of consciousness (DOC) with or without family members and to determine whether the presence of caregivers could improve clinical accuracy in diagnostic evaluation. The research was conducted on 92 adults with DOC among 153 consecutive patients enrolled in the Coma Research Centre of the Neurological Institute C. Besta of Milan between January 2011 and May 2013. The results indicate that in almost half of the sample the scoring, thus the performance, observed with caregivers was better than without them. Furthermore, in 16% of the sample, when assessment was performed with caregivers there was a change in diagnosis, from Vegetative to Minimally Conscious State or from that to Severe Disability. Finally, statistical differences were found in relation to diagnosis between mean scores in the "visual function" Coma Recovery Scale revised's subscale obtained by raters plus caregiver and rates only assessment. This study demonstrates how the presence of caregivers can positively affect behavioural assessments of persons with DOC, thus contributing to the definition of the optimal setting for behavioural evaluation of patients, to decrease misdiagnosis rates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Student > Master 10 14%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Other 7 10%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 29%
Neuroscience 10 14%
Psychology 9 13%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 18 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2014.
All research outputs
#18,379,018
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#3,632
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,402
of 238,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#34
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 238,988 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.