The Experts below are selected from a list of 261 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Edward J Stepanski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for insomnia report of an american academy of sleep medicine work group
    Sleep, 2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Andrew Jamieson, Vaughn W Mccall, Charles M Morin, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    Insomnia is a highly prevalent, often debilitating, and economically burdensome form of sleep disturbance caused by various situational, medical, emotional, environmental and behavioral factors. Although several consensually-derived nosologies have described numerous insomnia phenotypes, Research concerning these phenotypes has been greatly hampered by a lack of widely accepted operational Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for their definition. The lack of RDC has, in turn, led to inconsistent Research findings for most phenotypes largely due to the variable definitions used for their ascertainment. Given this problem, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) commissioned a Work Group (WG) to review the literature and identify those insomnia phenotypes that appear most valid and tenable. In addition, this WG was asked to derive standardized RDC for these phenotypes and recommend assessment procedures for their ascertainment. This report outlines the WG's findings, the insomnia RDC derived, and Research assessment procedures the WG recommends for identifying study participants who meet these RDC.

  • Derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for Insomnia: Report of an American Academy of Sleep Medicine Work Group AASM WORKING GROUP REPORT
    2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Charles M Morin, O Andrew, W. Vaughn Mccall, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    OVER 30 YEARS AGO, THE FIELD OF PSYCHIATRY FOUND ITSELF STRUGGLING WITH AN IMPRECISE Diagnostic SYSTEM THAT RESULTED IN UNRELIABLE Diagnostic ASSIGNMENTS ACROSS CLINICAL AND Research SETTINGS. Largely this was due to the absence of explicit operational Criteria in the Diagnostic manuals published to aid psychiatric Research and practice. As a result, Diagnostic practice was a highly subjective and unreliable process that relied as much on psychiatric clinicians’ and Researchers’ conceptions of the diagnoses they assigned as it did on the Diagnostic manuals designed to guide their decisions. Fortunately, this problem was effectively addressed by the development of Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) , a set of operationally defined inclusion and exclusion Criteria that standardized the definitions for a majority of the recognized psychiatric conditions. These RDC dramatically improved Diagnostic reliability among clinicians and Researchers and were quickly incorporated into psychiatry’s Diagnostic manuals. The field of sleep medicine currently finds itself only slightly ahead of where the field of psychiatry was 30 years ago. For some time now, sleep specialists have had at their disposal Diagnostic manuals that describe a range of sleep disorders and provide lists of Diagnostic Criteria for their ascertainment. However, sleep disorder diagnosis has been complicated by the existence of several distinctive nosologies that differ markedly and often produce rather discordant classification results. Moreover, many current Criteria sets for sleep diagnoses are vague or lack sufficient specificity to assure reliable diagnoses across clinical and Research settings. Recognizing this problem, work groups have convened to develop RDC-like definitions for selected sleep disorder diagnoses such as sleep apnea and restless legs syndrome. There is little doubt that such efforts will benefit the field greatly by standardizing clinical practice and Research with such disorders. Nonetheless, for many sleep disorders, Research and practice remains greatly hampered by a lack of universally accepted and precise Diagnostic Criteria. Nowhere is this problem more apparent than it is in the basic and clinical Research pertaining to insomnia. Although there has been general agreement that insomnia per se is a symptom and not necessarily an independent sleep disorder, there has been great variability in how this “symptom” has been defined in the literature. For example, some liberal definitions 17) focus solely on the presence of nocturnal sleep disturbances (e.g., sleep initiation or maintenance difficulties, nonrestorative sleep), whereas other more conservative definitions require additional features such as associated daytime impairment 19), sleep dissatisfaction, or meeting all Diagnostic Criteria for a sleep disorder

Richard Ohrbach - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Developing a Research Diagnostic Criteria for burning mouth syndrome: Results from an international Delphi process.
    Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2020
    Co-Authors: Charlotte C Currie, Richard Ohrbach, Reny De Leeuw, Heli Forssell, Yoshiki Imamura, Satu K. Jääskeläinen, Michail Koutris, Cibele Nasri-heir, Tan Huann, Tara Renton
    Abstract:

    Objective To develop a beta version of a preliminary set of empirically derived Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for burning mouth syndrome (BMS) through expert consensus, which can then be taken into a test period before publication of a final RDC/BMS. Design A 6 round Delphi process with twelve experts in the field of BMS was used. The first round formed a focus group during which the purpose of the RDC and the definition of BMS was agreed upon, as well as the structure and contents. The remaining rounds were carried out virtually via email to achieve a consensus of the beta version of the RDC/BMS. Results The definition of BMS was agreed to be 'an intraoral burning or dysaesthetic sensation, recurring daily for more than 2 hours per day over more than 3 months, without evident causative lesions on clinical examination and investigation'. The RDC was based upon the already developed and validated RDC/TMD and formed three main parts: patient self-report; examination; and psychosocial self-report. A fourth additional part was also developed listing aspirational biomarkers which could be used as part of the BMS diagnosis where available, or to inform future Research. Conclusion This Delphi process has created a beta version of an RDC for use with BMS. This will allow future clinical Research within BMS to be carried out to a higher standard, ensuring only patients with true BMS are included. Further validation studies will be required alongside refinement of the RDC as trialling progresses.

  • Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD): The Polish version of a dual-axis system for the diagnosis of TMD.* RDC/TMD form
    Journal of Stomatology (Czasopismo Stomatologiczne), 2013
    Co-Authors: Osiewicz, Frank Lobbezoo, Machiel Naeije, Bartłomiej Loster, Margaret Wilkosz, Richard Ohrbach
    Abstract:

    Aim of the study. To describe steps taken to conduct a formal forward translation/back-translation from English to Polish, and to establish the cultural equivalence of the Polish version of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). This will be preceded by a brief historic overview of the insights into TMD, so as to provide a rationale for using this dual-axis Diagnostic system. Methods. The Clinical Examination Form, the Specifications section, and the algorithms for axis I and II scoring of the RDC/TMD document were forward translated from English to Polish. In order to cross-culturally adapt the instrument, the History Questionnaire and the verbal directions for the patient (part of the Specifications section) were both forward translated and back-translated. Special attention was given to the questions from the History Questionnaire focusing on demographic characteristics. To that end, the official Translation Guidelines of the International RDC/TMD Consortium were followed. Results. No substantial difficulties in translating were encountered during either the forward translation process of the Clinical Examination Form, the Specifications section, and the algorithms, or during the forward and back- translation of the History Questionnaire and the verbal directives for the patient. Thus, a linguistically valid and culturally equivalent Polish translation resulted. Conclusions. Since the internationally established and accepted translation/adaptation Guidelines were used to establish the Polish version of RDC/TMD, this instrument is now available for the assessment of TMD in Poland.

  • Research Diagnostic Criteria for temporomandibular disorders rdc tmd the polish version of a dual axis system for the diagnosis of tmd rdc tmd form
    Czasopismo stomatologiczne, 2013
    Co-Authors: F Lobbezoo, Margaret Wilkosz, Bartłomiej Loster, M Naeije, Richard Ohrbach
    Abstract:

    Aim of the study. To describe steps taken to conduct a formal forward translation/back-translation from English to Polish, and to establish the cultural equivalence of the Polish version of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). This will be preceded by a brief historic overview of the insights into TMD, so as to provide a rationale for using this dual-axis Diagnostic system. Methods. The Clinical Examination Form, the Specifications section, and the algorithms for axis I and II scoring of the RDC/TMD document were forward translated from English to Polish. In order to cross-culturally adapt the instrument, the History Questionnaire and the verbal directions for the patient (part of the Specifications section) were both forward translated and back-translated. Special attention was given to the questions from the History Questionnaire focusing on demographic characteristics. To that end, the official Translation Guidelines of the International RDC/TMD Consortium were followed. Results. No substantial difficulties in translating were encountered during either the forward translation process of the Clinical Examination Form, the Specifications section, and the algorithms, or during the forward and back- translation of the History Questionnaire and the verbal directives for the patient. Thus, a linguistically valid and culturally equivalent Polish translation resulted. Conclusions. Since the internationally established and accepted translation/adaptation Guidelines were used to establish the Polish version of RDC/TMD, this instrument is now available for the assessment of TMD in Poland.

  • The Research Diagnostic Criteria For Temporomandibular Disorders. II: reliability of Axis I diagnoses and selected clinical measures.
    Journal of orofacial pain, 2010
    Co-Authors: John O Look, Mike T. John, Feng Tai, Kimberly H. Huggins, Patricia A Lenton, Edmond L. Truelove, Richard Ohrbach, Gary C. Anderson, Eric L. Schiffman
    Abstract:

    AIM To estimate inter-examiner reliability of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) protocol.

  • The Research Diagnostic Criteria for temporomandibular disorders. V: Methods used to establish and validate revised axis I Diagnostic algorithms
    Journal of orofacial pain, 2010
    Co-Authors: Eric L. Schiffman, Mike T. John, Feng Tai, Edmond L. Truelove, Richard Ohrbach, Gary C. Anderson, Wei Pan, Yoly Gonzalez, Earl Sommers, Thomas List
    Abstract:

    AIMS To derive reliable and valid revised Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Axis I Diagnostic algorithms for clinical TMD diagnoses.

Jack D Edinger - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for insomnia report of an american academy of sleep medicine work group
    Sleep, 2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Andrew Jamieson, Vaughn W Mccall, Charles M Morin, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    Insomnia is a highly prevalent, often debilitating, and economically burdensome form of sleep disturbance caused by various situational, medical, emotional, environmental and behavioral factors. Although several consensually-derived nosologies have described numerous insomnia phenotypes, Research concerning these phenotypes has been greatly hampered by a lack of widely accepted operational Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for their definition. The lack of RDC has, in turn, led to inconsistent Research findings for most phenotypes largely due to the variable definitions used for their ascertainment. Given this problem, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) commissioned a Work Group (WG) to review the literature and identify those insomnia phenotypes that appear most valid and tenable. In addition, this WG was asked to derive standardized RDC for these phenotypes and recommend assessment procedures for their ascertainment. This report outlines the WG's findings, the insomnia RDC derived, and Research assessment procedures the WG recommends for identifying study participants who meet these RDC.

  • Derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for Insomnia: Report of an American Academy of Sleep Medicine Work Group AASM WORKING GROUP REPORT
    2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Charles M Morin, O Andrew, W. Vaughn Mccall, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    OVER 30 YEARS AGO, THE FIELD OF PSYCHIATRY FOUND ITSELF STRUGGLING WITH AN IMPRECISE Diagnostic SYSTEM THAT RESULTED IN UNRELIABLE Diagnostic ASSIGNMENTS ACROSS CLINICAL AND Research SETTINGS. Largely this was due to the absence of explicit operational Criteria in the Diagnostic manuals published to aid psychiatric Research and practice. As a result, Diagnostic practice was a highly subjective and unreliable process that relied as much on psychiatric clinicians’ and Researchers’ conceptions of the diagnoses they assigned as it did on the Diagnostic manuals designed to guide their decisions. Fortunately, this problem was effectively addressed by the development of Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) , a set of operationally defined inclusion and exclusion Criteria that standardized the definitions for a majority of the recognized psychiatric conditions. These RDC dramatically improved Diagnostic reliability among clinicians and Researchers and were quickly incorporated into psychiatry’s Diagnostic manuals. The field of sleep medicine currently finds itself only slightly ahead of where the field of psychiatry was 30 years ago. For some time now, sleep specialists have had at their disposal Diagnostic manuals that describe a range of sleep disorders and provide lists of Diagnostic Criteria for their ascertainment. However, sleep disorder diagnosis has been complicated by the existence of several distinctive nosologies that differ markedly and often produce rather discordant classification results. Moreover, many current Criteria sets for sleep diagnoses are vague or lack sufficient specificity to assure reliable diagnoses across clinical and Research settings. Recognizing this problem, work groups have convened to develop RDC-like definitions for selected sleep disorder diagnoses such as sleep apnea and restless legs syndrome. There is little doubt that such efforts will benefit the field greatly by standardizing clinical practice and Research with such disorders. Nonetheless, for many sleep disorders, Research and practice remains greatly hampered by a lack of universally accepted and precise Diagnostic Criteria. Nowhere is this problem more apparent than it is in the basic and clinical Research pertaining to insomnia. Although there has been general agreement that insomnia per se is a symptom and not necessarily an independent sleep disorder, there has been great variability in how this “symptom” has been defined in the literature. For example, some liberal definitions 17) focus solely on the presence of nocturnal sleep disturbances (e.g., sleep initiation or maintenance difficulties, nonrestorative sleep), whereas other more conservative definitions require additional features such as associated daytime impairment 19), sleep dissatisfaction, or meeting all Diagnostic Criteria for a sleep disorder

Cynthia M Dorsey - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for insomnia report of an american academy of sleep medicine work group
    Sleep, 2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Andrew Jamieson, Vaughn W Mccall, Charles M Morin, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    Insomnia is a highly prevalent, often debilitating, and economically burdensome form of sleep disturbance caused by various situational, medical, emotional, environmental and behavioral factors. Although several consensually-derived nosologies have described numerous insomnia phenotypes, Research concerning these phenotypes has been greatly hampered by a lack of widely accepted operational Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for their definition. The lack of RDC has, in turn, led to inconsistent Research findings for most phenotypes largely due to the variable definitions used for their ascertainment. Given this problem, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) commissioned a Work Group (WG) to review the literature and identify those insomnia phenotypes that appear most valid and tenable. In addition, this WG was asked to derive standardized RDC for these phenotypes and recommend assessment procedures for their ascertainment. This report outlines the WG's findings, the insomnia RDC derived, and Research assessment procedures the WG recommends for identifying study participants who meet these RDC.

  • Derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for Insomnia: Report of an American Academy of Sleep Medicine Work Group AASM WORKING GROUP REPORT
    2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Charles M Morin, O Andrew, W. Vaughn Mccall, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    OVER 30 YEARS AGO, THE FIELD OF PSYCHIATRY FOUND ITSELF STRUGGLING WITH AN IMPRECISE Diagnostic SYSTEM THAT RESULTED IN UNRELIABLE Diagnostic ASSIGNMENTS ACROSS CLINICAL AND Research SETTINGS. Largely this was due to the absence of explicit operational Criteria in the Diagnostic manuals published to aid psychiatric Research and practice. As a result, Diagnostic practice was a highly subjective and unreliable process that relied as much on psychiatric clinicians’ and Researchers’ conceptions of the diagnoses they assigned as it did on the Diagnostic manuals designed to guide their decisions. Fortunately, this problem was effectively addressed by the development of Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) , a set of operationally defined inclusion and exclusion Criteria that standardized the definitions for a majority of the recognized psychiatric conditions. These RDC dramatically improved Diagnostic reliability among clinicians and Researchers and were quickly incorporated into psychiatry’s Diagnostic manuals. The field of sleep medicine currently finds itself only slightly ahead of where the field of psychiatry was 30 years ago. For some time now, sleep specialists have had at their disposal Diagnostic manuals that describe a range of sleep disorders and provide lists of Diagnostic Criteria for their ascertainment. However, sleep disorder diagnosis has been complicated by the existence of several distinctive nosologies that differ markedly and often produce rather discordant classification results. Moreover, many current Criteria sets for sleep diagnoses are vague or lack sufficient specificity to assure reliable diagnoses across clinical and Research settings. Recognizing this problem, work groups have convened to develop RDC-like definitions for selected sleep disorder diagnoses such as sleep apnea and restless legs syndrome. There is little doubt that such efforts will benefit the field greatly by standardizing clinical practice and Research with such disorders. Nonetheless, for many sleep disorders, Research and practice remains greatly hampered by a lack of universally accepted and precise Diagnostic Criteria. Nowhere is this problem more apparent than it is in the basic and clinical Research pertaining to insomnia. Although there has been general agreement that insomnia per se is a symptom and not necessarily an independent sleep disorder, there has been great variability in how this “symptom” has been defined in the literature. For example, some liberal definitions 17) focus solely on the presence of nocturnal sleep disturbances (e.g., sleep initiation or maintenance difficulties, nonrestorative sleep), whereas other more conservative definitions require additional features such as associated daytime impairment 19), sleep dissatisfaction, or meeting all Diagnostic Criteria for a sleep disorder

Karl Doghramji - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for insomnia report of an american academy of sleep medicine work group
    Sleep, 2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Andrew Jamieson, Vaughn W Mccall, Charles M Morin, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    Insomnia is a highly prevalent, often debilitating, and economically burdensome form of sleep disturbance caused by various situational, medical, emotional, environmental and behavioral factors. Although several consensually-derived nosologies have described numerous insomnia phenotypes, Research concerning these phenotypes has been greatly hampered by a lack of widely accepted operational Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for their definition. The lack of RDC has, in turn, led to inconsistent Research findings for most phenotypes largely due to the variable definitions used for their ascertainment. Given this problem, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) commissioned a Work Group (WG) to review the literature and identify those insomnia phenotypes that appear most valid and tenable. In addition, this WG was asked to derive standardized RDC for these phenotypes and recommend assessment procedures for their ascertainment. This report outlines the WG's findings, the insomnia RDC derived, and Research assessment procedures the WG recommends for identifying study participants who meet these RDC.

  • Derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for Insomnia: Report of an American Academy of Sleep Medicine Work Group AASM WORKING GROUP REPORT
    2004
    Co-Authors: Jack D Edinger, Michael H Bonnet, Richard R Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M Dorsey, Colin A Espie, Charles M Morin, O Andrew, W. Vaughn Mccall, Edward J Stepanski
    Abstract:

    OVER 30 YEARS AGO, THE FIELD OF PSYCHIATRY FOUND ITSELF STRUGGLING WITH AN IMPRECISE Diagnostic SYSTEM THAT RESULTED IN UNRELIABLE Diagnostic ASSIGNMENTS ACROSS CLINICAL AND Research SETTINGS. Largely this was due to the absence of explicit operational Criteria in the Diagnostic manuals published to aid psychiatric Research and practice. As a result, Diagnostic practice was a highly subjective and unreliable process that relied as much on psychiatric clinicians’ and Researchers’ conceptions of the diagnoses they assigned as it did on the Diagnostic manuals designed to guide their decisions. Fortunately, this problem was effectively addressed by the development of Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) , a set of operationally defined inclusion and exclusion Criteria that standardized the definitions for a majority of the recognized psychiatric conditions. These RDC dramatically improved Diagnostic reliability among clinicians and Researchers and were quickly incorporated into psychiatry’s Diagnostic manuals. The field of sleep medicine currently finds itself only slightly ahead of where the field of psychiatry was 30 years ago. For some time now, sleep specialists have had at their disposal Diagnostic manuals that describe a range of sleep disorders and provide lists of Diagnostic Criteria for their ascertainment. However, sleep disorder diagnosis has been complicated by the existence of several distinctive nosologies that differ markedly and often produce rather discordant classification results. Moreover, many current Criteria sets for sleep diagnoses are vague or lack sufficient specificity to assure reliable diagnoses across clinical and Research settings. Recognizing this problem, work groups have convened to develop RDC-like definitions for selected sleep disorder diagnoses such as sleep apnea and restless legs syndrome. There is little doubt that such efforts will benefit the field greatly by standardizing clinical practice and Research with such disorders. Nonetheless, for many sleep disorders, Research and practice remains greatly hampered by a lack of universally accepted and precise Diagnostic Criteria. Nowhere is this problem more apparent than it is in the basic and clinical Research pertaining to insomnia. Although there has been general agreement that insomnia per se is a symptom and not necessarily an independent sleep disorder, there has been great variability in how this “symptom” has been defined in the literature. For example, some liberal definitions 17) focus solely on the presence of nocturnal sleep disturbances (e.g., sleep initiation or maintenance difficulties, nonrestorative sleep), whereas other more conservative definitions require additional features such as associated daytime impairment 19), sleep dissatisfaction, or meeting all Diagnostic Criteria for a sleep disorder