Pediatric Glasgow Coma Scale information request

Gerard Freriks gfrer at luna.nl
Tue Mar 18 03:53:17 EDT 2014


> What is in general your opinion on the same instrument revalidated for other target groups? Should these be equivalent or different identified, modelled and coded from the original instrument?

In Jan Talmons example there are four axis:
- set of questions
- set of possible answers for each question
- algorithm to calculate the result
- the result interpretation

It is the same scale when all these four axis are identical.
When they are not, each variation has to be a separate scale.

In the example I see 5 different scales.
All have the same ‘pattern’ of 3 sections,
with respectively 4, 6, 5 different questions,
plus one common algorithm.
I assume the same interpretation of the result for all 5 scales.

GF

Gerard Freriks
+31 620347088
gfrer at luna.nl

On 18 mrt. 2014, at 08:09, Talmon (CRISP) <talmon at maastrichtuniversity.nl> wrote:

> William
> 
> Het is zelfs nog meer gecompliceerd omdat e.e.a nog van leeftijd afhankelijk is. Een simpel google leverde http://ilemsc.org/PTHI/PGCS_Form.pdf
> 
> On 18 mrt. 2014, at 06:18, William R4C <wgoossen at results4care.nl> wrote:

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140318/dfea565b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20140318/dfea565b/attachment.asc>


More information about the openEHR-clinical mailing list