Are you D F Signorini?

Claim your profile

Publications (3)2.6 Total impact

  • D J Hellawell, D F Signorini, B Pentland
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The relative's questionnaire (RQ) was developed to assess outcome after brain injury. The present study investigated its test-retest reliability when used in a postal survey. Hospital records were used to identify and contact 288 surviving patients treated for brain injury five to seven years earlier. Patients were sent a copy of the RQ (RQ1) and one month later a second copy (RQ2) was sent to those who returned RQ1. Two hundred and eleven patients were successfully contacted, of whom 128 (61%) returned RQ1, and 94 of these (73%) returned RQ2. The reliability of items was variable, with most having a kappa value of > 0.6 suggesting 'substantial agreement' or better. The data presented suggest that the RQ is a reliable instrument in collecting outcome information in brain-injured patients by postal survey. Further research is recommended to test the suitability of the RQ for the use as a telephone interview.
    Disability and Rehabilitation 08/2000; 22(10):446-50. · 1.54 Impact Factor
  • D J Hellawell, D F Signorini, B Pentland
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate alternative methods of determining Glasgow Outcome Scale scores, a postal survey was made of 288 general practitioners and 128 relatives of patients who had sustained acute brain injuries 5-7 years previously. The Glasgow Outcome Scale score from the general practitioner and relative were compared with that calculated from questionnaire information by an experienced rater. There was poor agreement between general practitioner and rater (K = 0.17) and relative and rater (K = 0.35) scores. Both general practitioners and relatives indicated more favourable outcomes than the rater, with a higher level of agreement (K = 0.61) between them. When Glasgow Outcome Scale scores are used, the methods employed should be valid and reliable; failure to ensure this may be responsible for a considerable proportion of variability in reported studies of brain injury outcome.
    Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 04/2000; 32(1):25-7.
  • D J Hellawell, D F Signorini
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) is the most widely used outcome measure in head injury research. However, it is a global and relatively insensitive measure, precluding any description of the types of impairments that lead to the disability. The Edinburgh Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (EEGOS) was devised as a new outcome measure that retains the advantages of the existing GOS but allows comparison of patterns of recovery in different areas of function; behavioural, cognitive and physical. This report describes pilot studies of the EEGOS used retrospectively, and in 'live' face-to-face interviews. The results show raw percentage agreements of 45%, 60% and 70% in the retrospective study, and 83%, 78% and 83% in the 'live' study. These results demonstrate that the inter-rater reliability of the EEGOS is comparable to that of the GOS applied in similar situations.
    International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 01/1998; 20(4):345-54. · 1.06 Impact Factor