Abstract:The purpose of this study was to differentiate clinically meaningful improvement or deterioration from normal fluctuations in patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) following severe brain injury. We computed indices of responsiveness for the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) using data from a clinical trial of 180 participants with DoC. We used CRS-R scores from baseline (enrollment in a clinical trial) and a 4-week follow-up assessment period for these calculations. To improve precision, we transformed ordinal CRS-R total scores (0-23 points) to equal-interval measures on a 0-100 unit scale using Rasch Measurement theory. Using the 0-100 unit total Rasch measures, we calculated distribution-based 0.5 standard deviation (SD) minimal clinically important difference, minimal detectable change using 95% confidence intervals, and conditional minimal detectable change using 95% confidence intervals. The distribution-based minimal clinically important difference evaluates group-level changes, whereas the minimal detectable change values evaluate individual-level changes. The minimal clinically important difference and minimal detectable change are derived using the overall variability across total measures at baseline and 4 weeks. The conditional minimal detectable change is generated for each possible pair of CRS-R Rasch person measures and accounts for variation in standard error across the scale. We applied these indices to determine the proportions of participants who made a change beyond measurement error within each of the two subgroups, based on treatment arm (amantadine hydrochloride or placebo) or categorization of baseline Rasch person measure to states of consciousness (i.e., unresponsive wakefulness syndrome and minimally conscious state). We compared the proportion of participants in each treatment arm who made a change according to the minimal detectable change and determined whether they also changed to another state of consciousness. CRS-R indices of responsiveness (using the 0-100 transformed scale) were as follows: 0.5SD minimal clinically important difference = 9 units, minimal detectable change = 11 units, and the conditional minimal detectable change ranged from 11 to 42 units. For the amantadine and placebo groups, 70% and 58% of participants showed change beyond measurement error using the minimal detectable change, respectively. For the unresponsive wakefulness syndrome and minimally conscious state groups, 54% and 69% of participants changed beyond measurement error using the minimal detectable change, respectively. Among 115 participants (64% of the total sample) who made a change beyond measurement error, 29 participants (25%) did not change state of consciousness. CRS-R indices of responsiveness can support clinicians and researchers in discerning when behavioral changes in patients with DoC exceed measurement error. Notably, the minimal detectable change can support the detection of patients who make a "true" change within or across states of consciousness. Our findings highlight that the continued use of ordinal scores may result in incorrect inferences about the degree and relevance of a change score.

Rasch Analysis of the Chinese Version of the Nociception Coma Scale–Revised in Patients with Prolonged Disorders of Consciousness

Evaluation of the consciousness scales in the diagnosis of the severely impaired consciousness

Validation of the Chinese version of the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R).

Chinese Translation of the Coma Recovery Scale—Revised

Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version of the Preoperative Assessment of Readiness Tool among Surgical Patients

Interpreting Change in Disorders of Consciousness Using the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised

Chinese version of narcolepsy severity scale: a validation study

The Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version of the Pain Relief Motivation Scale in Patients with Neurogenic Chronic Pain

Cross-cultural difference and validation of the Chinese version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment in older adults residing in Eastern China: preliminary findings.

Psychometric Validation of the Simplified Chinese Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale in Patients with Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain.

Feasibility and Validity of the Coma Recovery Scale‐Revised For Accelerated Standardized Testing: A practical assessment tool for detecting consciousness in the intensive care unit

The Validity, Reliability and Feasibility of Four Instruments for Assessing the Consciousness of Stroke Patients in a Neurological Intensive Care Unit Compared

Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of Narcolepsy Severity Scale in Adult Patients with Narcolepsy Type 1

The reliability and validity of a slightly optimized Chinese version simplified modified Rankin scale questionnaire

The Reliability and Validity of a Novel Chinese Version Simplified Modified Rankin Scale Questionnaire(2011)

The reliability and validity of a slightly revised Chinese version simplified modified Rankin scale questionnaire

Nociception Coma Scale-Revised with Personalized Painful Stimulus Versus Standard Stimulation in Persons with Disorders of Consciousness: An International Multicenter Study

Validation of the Very Efficient Short‐Form Need for Cognition Scale in Chinese: Detecting the effect of item orientation

Coma recovery scale-r: variability in the disorder of consciousness

Which information derived from the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised provides the most reliable prediction of clinical diagnosis and recovery of consciousness? A comparative study using machine learning techniques