Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Objective: The revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R) is the most commonly used outcome measure in ALS studies. The aim of this study was to identify potential limitations of the ALSFRS-R from the perspective of people living with ALS and their caregivers.
Methods: A web-based survey was developed by investigators, people living with ALS, and their caregivers, and shared across social media. For each item, participants were asked, "Can you think of a situation where you might not be able to answer this item accurately or that your answer might not reflect your abilities?" Responses were divided into two categories: criticisms that could be addressed in a manual or issues with the items/responses that would require measure modification.
Results: 57 participants (72% participants with ALS, 28% caregivers) responded to at least one item question, of which 71.9% expressed concern about at least one item. The most frequently identified items were speech, walking, and cutting food. Common criticisms were: language used is of a medical literacy level too high; item is situational; difficult to distinguish the difference between response choices; and the structure and/or underlying assumptions of the item makes it difficult to answer.
Conclusions: Several items of the ALSFRS-R were considered to inaccurately reflect the abilities of patients with ALS. The ALSFRS-R may need a revision to address these issues, preferably in co-development with people living with ALS and their caregivers, and/or alternate outcome measures should be considered for patients with ALS.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21678421.2022.2140592 | DOI Listing |