Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The Glasgow Coma Scale: time for change.

M Segatore1, C Way

  • 1School of Nursing, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Canada.

Heart & Lung : the Journal of Critical Care
|November 1, 1992
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Long-term psychosocial and behavioral adjustment in individuals receiving genetic test results in Lynch syndrome.

Clinical genetics·2014
Same author

Development and validation of an instrument to measure the impact of genetic testing on self-concept in Lynch syndrome.

Clinical genetics·2011
Same author

A successful equine laparotomy.

The Cornell veterinarian·2010
Same author

Colic due to intestinal calculi.

The Cornell veterinarian·2010
Same author

Significance of the fellowship examination.

Canadian Medical Association journal·2010
Same author

Primary oral leiomyosarcoma: a clinico-pathologic study and analysis of prognostic factors.

International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery·2007
Same journal

Diagnosing heart failure through imaging.

Heart & lung : the journal of critical care·2026
Same journal

Comparative utility of median household income, social vulnerability index, and social deprivation index in predicting heart failure-related emergency department revisits: A multi-hospital cohort study.

Heart & lung : the journal of critical care·2026
Same journal

Predicting in-hospital mortality in AECOPD: A comparison of the mSOFA score with DECAF, Ottawa, and GOLD classifications.

Heart & lung : the journal of critical care·2026
Same journal

Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests and biomarkers for hypersensitivity pneumonitis: A systematic review.

Heart & lung : the journal of critical care·2026
Same journal

Associations of genetic risk factors and air pollution with incident pulmonary embolism: a prospective cohort study in the UK Biobank.

Heart & lung : the journal of critical care·2026
Same journal

Impaired hemostasis in mechanical circulatory support systems: Monitoring with T-TAS® 01, in vitro correction with VWF concentrates, and impact of membrane oxygenators.

Heart & lung : the journal of critical care·2026
See all related articles

The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) has limited utility for monitoring consciousness and prediction, despite its widespread use. Newer instruments offer better reliability and validity for clinical and research settings.

Area of Science:

  • Neuroscience
  • Clinical Assessment
  • Medical Instrumentation

Background:

  • The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a widely used tool for assessing neurological function.
  • Its psychometric properties are crucial for reliable clinical monitoring and patient prognostication.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the existing evidence on the psychometric properties of the GCS.
  • To compare the GCS with alternative instruments in terms of reliability and validity.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review and critical appraisal of studies reporting on GCS psychometric properties.
  • Comparative analysis of GCS performance against other consciousness assessment tools.

Main Results:

  • The GCS demonstrates pragmatic utility but possesses significant limitations in clinical monitoring and predictive accuracy.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Evidence suggests that the GCS is being superseded by alternative instruments with superior psychometric performance.

    • Conclusions:

    • Despite recognized shortcomings and the availability of more reliable and valid alternatives, the GCS retains an unjustified prominence in clinical practice and research.
    • Re-evaluation of GCS use is warranted, considering its limitations and the strengths of emerging assessment tools.