Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 10, 2026
Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke
Published on: January 7, 2019
Evaluation of a self-administered version of the Revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale
Thais Alves Cunha1, Laura Carvalheira Dourado2, Glauciane Costa Santana3
1Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências da Saúde, Natal RN, Brazil.
Background:
The Revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R) is a standard tool for evaluating functional decline in patients with ALS. Despite its clinical value, administration by healthcare professionals can be time-consuming and resource intensive.
Objective:
To assess the reliability and feasibility of a self-administration version of the ALSFRS-R as an alternative for use in clinical and research settings.
Methods:
The present was an observational, analytical, prospective, single-center study involving ALS patients followed at the Neurology Outpatient Clinic of the Hospital Universitário Onofre Lopes (HUOL). Three independent assessments of the ALSFRS-R were conducted: one self-administered version and two interviewer-administered versions performed by different researchers during face-to-face consultations. Interrater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and agreement among the three versions was analyzed using Bland-Altman plots.
Results:
A total of 43 participants were included in the study, with a mean age of 57 ± 11.67 years. The ICCs indicated high reliability for both the total ALSFRS-R score and its functional domains. Linear regression analyses demonstrated strong agreement between the two researchers (R2 = 0.98, p < 0.001), as well as between each researcher and the self-administered version (R2 = 0.90 and 0.88, respectively). Bland-Altman analyses showed minimal bias and acceptable limits of agreement across all comparisons.
Conclusion:
The self-administered version of the ALSFRS-R demonstrated high reliability and strong agreement with the researcher-administered versions, supporting its potential use for remote monitoring of ALS patients. Nonetheless, it should not replace professional assessments in clinical trial settings. Further research is warranted to validate its applicability in broader clinical contexts and diverse patient populations.
