↓ Skip to main content

The Performance Scales disability measure for multiple sclerosis: use and sensitivity to clinically important differences

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Performance Scales disability measure for multiple sclerosis: use and sensitivity to clinically important differences
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0614-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolyn E. Schwartz, Victoria E. Powell

Abstract

In 1993, the Performance Scales© was created to assess multi-dimensional disability in multiple sclerosis (MS). This tool has been used in a variety of settings and study designs internationally. The present work provides an overview of the history and psychometric characteristics of the Performance Scales©, reviews its use over the past two decades, and summarizes its responsiveness to subgroup differences. A Google Scholar and Ovid search yielded 230 articles citing the Performance Scales©, of which 82 studies used the tool in empirical research. Twelve articles provided sufficient information to enable computation of effect sizes. Forest plots were used to show effect sizes for the overall summary score and by domain by patient demographics, MS disease trajectory, and treatment adherence. The Performance Scales© evidenced sensitivity to clinically important differences by disease trajectory and age (for selected domains). In contrast, groups distinguished by patient adherence to disease-modifying therapies and ethnicity were relatively small. The Performance Scales© has been used in a large number of studies since its development, suggesting that this psychometrically sound tool is acknowledged to be a useful tool for MS clinical research. It is recommended that future work include the entire measure, so that the whole-person impact of MS can be characterized and considered in MS outcome research.

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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Master 4 9%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 24%
Psychology 5 11%
Neuroscience 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 11 24%
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 09 March 2017.
All research outputs
#17,881,664
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,509
of 2,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,229
of 307,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#37
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 307,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.