| Title |
International Paediatric Mitochondrial Disease Scale
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10545-016-9948-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Saskia Koene, Jan C. M. Hendriks, Ilse Dirks, Lonneke de Boer, Maaike C. de Vries, Mirian C. H. Janssen, Izelle Smuts, Cheuk‐Wing Fung, Virginia C. N. Wong, I. René F. M. de Coo, Katharina Vill, Claudia Stendel, Thomas Klopstock, Marni J. Falk, Elizabeth M. McCormick, Robert McFarland, Imelda J. M. de Groot, Jan A. M. Smeitink |
| Abstract |
There is an urgent need for reliable and universally applicable outcome measures for children with mitochondrial diseases. In this study, we aimed to adapt the currently available Newcastle Paediatric Mitochondrial Disease Scale (NPMDS) to the International Paediatric Mitochondrial Disease Scale (IPMDS) during a Delphi-based process with input from international collaborators, patients and caretakers, as well as a pilot reliability study in eight patients. Subsequently, we aimed to test the feasibility, construct validity and reliability of the IPMDS in a multicentre study. A clinically, biochemically and genetically heterogeneous group of 17 patients (age 1.6-16 years) from five different expert centres from four different continents were evaluated in this study. The feasibility of the IPMDS was good, as indicated by a low number of missing items (4 %) and the positive evaluation of patients, parents and users. Principal component analysis of our small sample identified three factors, which explained 57.9 % of the variance. Good construct validity was found using hypothesis testing. The overall interrater reliability was good [median intraclass correlation coefficient for agreement between raters (ICCagreement) 0.85; range 0.23-0.99). In conclusion, we suggest using the IPMDS for assessing natural history in children with mitochondrial diseases. These data should be used to further explore construct validity of the IPMDS and to set age limits. In parallel, responsiveness and the minimal clinically important difference should be studied to facilitate sample size calculations in future clinical trials. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 20% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 24% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 20% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Unknown | 16 | 31% |
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 01 February 2020.
All research outputs
#15,377,214
of 22,876,619 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease
#1,474
of 1,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,613
of 343,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,876,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,844 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 343,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.