Utilising accessible and reproducible neurological assessments in clinical studies: Insights from use of the Neurological Impairment Scale in the multi-centre COVID-CNS study

Reproducible and standardised neurological assessment scales are important in quantifying research outcomes. These scales are often performed by non-neurologists and/or non-clinicians and must be robust, quantifiable, reproducible and comparable to a neurologist's assessment. COVID-CNS is a multi-centre study which utilised the Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) as a core assessment tool in studying neurological outcomes following COVID-19 infection. We investigated the strengths and weaknesses of the NIS when used by non-neurology clinicians and non-clinicians, and compared performance to a structured neurological examination performed by a neurology clinician. Through our findings, we provide practical advice on how non-clinicians can be readily trained in conducting reproducible and standardised neurological assessments in a multi-centre study, as well as illustrating potential pitfalls of these tools.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Medicine
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinme.2024.100241
Primary Topic
Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Utilising accessible and reproducible neurological assessments in clinical studies: Insights from use of the Neurological Impairment Scale in the multi-centre COVID-CNS study

Timothy R. Nicholson, Yun Huang, Gerome D. Breen, Tom Solomon et al.
Clinical Medicine
Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
article

Utilising accessible and reproducible neurological assessments in clinical studies: Insights from use of the Neurological Impairment Scale in the multi-centre COVID-CNS study

Timothy R. Nicholson, Yun Huang, Gerome D. Breen, Tom Solomon, Mark Ellul, James B Lilleker, Katherine Dodd, Nicholas Davies, Glynn W. Webb, Michael S. Zandi, Benedict Michael, Thomas Pollak, Daniel J. van Wamelen, Ali M. Alam, Laura Benjamin, Ava Easton, Rhys Huw Thomas, Nicholas William Wood, Ceryce Collie, Rajish Sanjit Kumar Shil, Arina Tamborska, Thomas M. Jenkins, Craig J. Smith, Orla Hilton, Sashini Mariathasan
article en

Abstract

Reproducible and standardised neurological assessment scales are important in quantifying research outcomes. These scales are often performed by non-neurologists and/or non-clinicians and must be robust, quantifiable, reproducible and comparable to a neurologist's assessment. COVID-CNS is a multi-centre study which utilised the Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) as a core assessment tool in studying neurological outcomes following COVID-19 infection. We investigated the strengths and weaknesses of the NIS when used by non-neurology clinicians and non-clinicians, and compared performance to a structured neurological examination performed by a neurology clinician. Through our findings, we provide practical advice on how non-clinicians can be readily trained in conducting reproducible and standardised neurological assessments in a multi-centre study, as well as illustrating potential pitfalls of these tools.

Clinical MedicineVol. 24(5)
King's College London (GB), Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB), Charing Cross Hospital (GB), National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB), University College London (GB), Newcastle University (GB)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.