<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Maier A</submitter><funding>Boris Canessa ALS Stiftung</funding><funding>Martin Herrenknecht Fonds for ALS Research</funding><pagination>250-259</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC12803583</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>73(2)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Introduction/aims&lt;/h4>The harmonized version of the ALS Functional Rating Scale - Revised (ALSFRS-R) is typically administered according to standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure procedural consistency. In contrast, obtaining the self-explanatory (SE) version of the ALSFRS-R does not include the use of SOPs. The aim of this study was to examine the level of agreement between the harmonized and the SE version of the ALSFRS-R in a cohort of ALS patients.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>In a prospective study, the harmonized ALSFRS-R was assessed in 107 ALS patients. In parallel, all patients independently completed the ALSFRS-R-SE, either on a printed form (n = 36) or remotely via the ALS App (n = 71). Agreement between methods was investigated using Spearman's correlation, Lin's concordance corr</pubmed_abstract><journal>Muscle &amp; nerve</journal><pubmed_title>Agreement Between the Harmonized and the Self-Explanatory Versions of the Revised ALS Functional Rating Scale in a Clinical Setting.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC12803583</pmcid><funding_grant_id>H4017703513237604</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Riitano A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Spittel S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Meyer T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kettemann D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Koc Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kolzarek F</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Munch C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Maier A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Norden J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Schmitt P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Steinfurth L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Subramanian S</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Agreement Between the Harmonized and the Self-Explanatory Versions of the Revised ALS Functional Rating Scale in a Clinical Setting.</name><description>&lt;h4>Introduction/aims&lt;/h4>The harmonized version of the ALS Functional Rating Scale - Revised (ALSFRS-R) is typically administered according to standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure procedural consistency. In contrast, obtaining the self-explanatory (SE) version of the ALSFRS-R does not include the use of SOPs. The aim of this study was to examine the level of agreement between the harmonized and the SE version of the ALSFRS-R in a cohort of ALS patients.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>In a prospective study, the harmonized ALSFRS-R was assessed in 107 ALS patients. In parallel, all patients independently completed the ALSFRS-R-SE, either on a printed form (n = 36) or remotely via the ALS App (n = 71). Agreement between methods was investigated using Spearman's correlation, Lin's concordance corr</description><dates><release>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2026 Feb</publication><modification>2026-06-06T13:18:09.176Z</modification><creation>2026-05-31T03:07:22.079Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC12803583</accession><cross_references><pubmed>41328555</pubmed><doi>10.1002/mus.70092</doi></cross_references></HashMap>