Clinical Medicine (Sep 2024)

Utilising accessible and reproducible neurological assessments in clinical studies: Insights from use of the Neurological Impairment Scale in the multi-centre COVID-CNS study

  • Ali M. Alam,
  • Glynn W. Webb,
  • Ceryce Collie,
  • Sashini Mariathasan,
  • Yun Huang,
  • Orla Hilton,
  • Rajish Shil,
  • Katherine C. Dodd,
  • James B. Lilleker,
  • Craig J. Smith,
  • Ava Easton,
  • Arina Tamborska,
  • Rhys H. Thomas,
  • Nicholas W.S. Davies,
  • Thomas M. Jenkins,
  • Michael Zandi,
  • Laura Benjamin,
  • Mark A. Ellul,
  • Tom Solomon,
  • Thomas A. Pollak,
  • Tim Nicholson,
  • Gerome Breen,
  • Daniel J. van Wamelen,
  • Nicholas W. Wood,
  • Benedict D. Michael

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 5
p. 100241

Abstract

Read online

Reproducible and standardised neurological assessment scales are important in quantifying research outcomes. These scales are often performed by non-neurologists and/or non-clinicians and must be robust, quantifiable, reproducible and comparable to a neurologist's assessment. COVID-CNS is a multi-centre study which utilised the Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) as a core assessment tool in studying neurological outcomes following COVID-19 infection. We investigated the strengths and weaknesses of the NIS when used by non-neurology clinicians and non-clinicians, and compared performance to a structured neurological examination performed by a neurology clinician. Through our findings, we provide practical advice on how non-clinicians can be readily trained in conducting reproducible and standardised neurological assessments in a multi-centre study, as well as illustrating potential pitfalls of these tools.

Keywords