1991
DOI: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)91309-i
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reliability and accuracy of the Glasgow Coma Scale with experienced and inexperienced users

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
153
2
14

Year Published

2002
2002
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 249 publications
(177 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
8
153
2
14
Order By: Relevance
“…These vital signs are associated with adverse clinical outcomes and are measured periodically and frequently 6, 16, 26. Furthermore, they are objective values that are barely affected by medical staff measuring them 27. We defined the input vector as the predictor variables observed at the same time, and each input vector consisted of 4 vital signs: systolic blood pressure, HR, respiratory rate, and BT.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These vital signs are associated with adverse clinical outcomes and are measured periodically and frequently 6, 16, 26. Furthermore, they are objective values that are barely affected by medical staff measuring them 27. We defined the input vector as the predictor variables observed at the same time, and each input vector consisted of 4 vital signs: systolic blood pressure, HR, respiratory rate, and BT.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The GCS, which was developed, validated, and used widely to assess the level of consciousness and prognosis of patients with acute traumatic brain injuries (Rowley and Fielding, 1991) and non-traumatic causes of coma (Mullie et al , 1988), is insufficient for the assessment of vegetative state and minimally conscious state because of its crude measurement of awareness and its omission of relevant neurological functions (Howard and Hirsch, 1999).…”
Section: Glasgow Coma Scale (Gcs)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…뇌손상으로부터 회복된 정도를 의미하며 본 연구에서는 Rappaport Disability Rating Scale (DRS) (Rappaport, Hall, Hopkins, Belleza, & Cope, 1982 (Bahloul et al, 2004;Hukkelhoven et al, 2005;Mosenthal et al, 2004;Rovlias & Kotsou, 2004 (Bakay & Ward, 1983;Jagger, Jane, & Rimel, 1983;Jennett & Teasdale, 1977) 측정자 사이의 신뢰도 또한 양호한 것으로(r=0.86-0.95) 제시되었다 (Rowley & Fielding, 1991;Stanczak, White, & Gouview, 1984). …”
Section: ) 회복 정도unclassified