Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Our objective was to survey ALS clinicians and researchers regarding what percentage reduction in the ALSFRS-R (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale - Revised) slope they would consider clinically meaningful. A nine-question survey was provided to 65 members of the Northeast ALS Consortium (NEALS). They were asked to rate the clinical relevance of 10-50% changes in decline of the ALSFRS-R slope on a seven-point scale (1-7), where 1='not at all clinically meaningful', 4='somewhat clinically meaningful', and 7='very clinically meaningful'. Ninety per cent of participants rated a 20% change in the decline of the ALSFRS-R score as the percentage in which a somewhat clinically significant change starts to be noted (i.e. score of 4 or higher). All participants endorsed a 25% or higher change in the ALSFRS-R score as at least somewhat clinically meaningful (score of 4 or higher). Ninety-three per cent of the participants viewed a 50% change in decline as very clinically meaningful (score of 7). This survey demonstrated that the majority of clinicians and clinical researchers surveyed believe that a therapy that resulted in a change of 20% or greater in the slope of the ALSFRS-R would be clinically meaningful.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Castrillo‐Viguera et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: