Patient-based outcomes of cervical dystonia: A review of rating scales

Authors

  • Stefan J. Cano PhD,

    1. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Royal Free & University College Medical School, London, United Kingdom
    2. Neurological Outcome Measures Unit, Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jeremy C. Hobart PhD, MRCP,

    1. Neurological Outcome Measures Unit, Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
    2. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Peninsula Medical School, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Ray Fitzpatrick PhD,

    1. Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Kailash Bhatia MD, FRCP,

    1. Sobell Department of Movement Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, Institute of Neurology, University College London, Queen Square, London, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Alan J. Thompson MD, FRCP,

    1. Neurological Outcome Measures Unit, Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Thomas T. Warner PhD, FRCP

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Royal Free & University College Medical School, London, United Kingdom
    • Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Royal Free and University College Medical School, Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF, UK
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Decisions on treatment choice for patients are based on trials and outcome studies that are wholly dependent upon the scientific quality of the rating scales used. This study reviewed rating scales used in cervical dystonia outcome research to determine the extent that they satisfy recommended criteria for rigorous measurement. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society

Ancillary