Dataset Information

Inter-Rater Agreement between Trachoma Graders: Comparison of Grades Given in Field Conditions versus Grades from Photographic Review.

ABSTRACT: Trachoma surveillance is most commonly performed by direct observation, usually by non-ophthalmologists using the World Health Organization (WHO) simplified grading system. However, conjunctival photographs may offer several benefits over direct clinical observation, including the potential for greater inter-rater agreement. This study assesses whether inter-rater agreement of trachoma grading differs when trained graders review conjunctival photographs compared to when they perform conjunctival examinations in the field.Three trained trachoma graders each performed an independent examination of the everted right tarsal conjunctiva of 269 children aged 0-9 years, and then reviewed photographs of these same conjunctivae in a random order. For each eye, the grader documented the presence or absence of follicular trachoma (TF) and intense trachomatous inflammation (TI) according to the WHO simplified grading system.Inter-rater agreement for the grade of TF was significantly higher in the field (kappa coefficient, ?, 0.73, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.67-0.80) than by photographic review (??=?0.55, 95% CI 0.49-0.63; difference in ? between field grading and photo grading 0.18, 95% CI 0.09-0.26). When field and photographic grades were each assessed as the consensus grade from the three graders, agreement between in-field and photographic graders was high for TF (??=?0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.84).In an area with hyperendemic trachoma, inter-rater agreement was lower for photographic assessment of trachoma than for in-field assessment. However, the trachoma grade reached by a consensus of photographic graders agreed well with the grade given by a consensus of in-field graders.

SUBMITTER: Gebresillasie S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4802863 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Inter-Rater Agreement between Trachoma Graders: Comparison of Grades Given in Field Conditions versus Grades from Photographic Review.

Gebresillasie Sintayehu S Tadesse Zerihun Z Shiferaw Ayalew A Yu Sun N SN Stoller Nicole E NE Zhou Zhaoxia Z Emerson Paul M PM Gaynor Bruce D BD Lietman Thomas M TM Keenan Jeremy D JD

Ophthalmic epidemiology 20150101 3

<h4>Purpose</h4>Trachoma surveillance is most commonly performed by direct observation, usually by non-ophthalmologists using the World Health Organization (WHO) simplified grading system. However, conjunctival photographs may offer several benefits over direct clinical observation, including the potential for greater inter-rater agreement. This study assesses whether inter-rater agreement of trachoma grading differs when trained graders review conjunctival photographs compared to when they perf ...[more]

PMID: 26158573

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives To explore agreement among healthcare professionals assessing eligibility for work disability benefits.Design Systematic review and narrative synthesis of reproducibility studies.Data sources Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO searched up to 16 March 2016, without language restrictions, and review of bibliographies of included studies.Eligibility criteria Observational studies investigating reproducibility among healthcare professionals performing disability evaluations using a global rating of working capacity and reporting inter-rater reliability by a statistical measure or descriptively. Studies could be conducted in insurance settings, where decisions on ability to work include normative judgments based on legal considerations, or in research settings, where decisions on ability to work disregard normative considerations. : Teams of paired reviewers identified eligible studies, appraised their methodological quality and generalisability, and abstracted results with pretested forms. As heterogeneity of research designs and findings impeded a quantitative analysis, a descriptive synthesis stratified by setting (insurance or research) was performed.Results From 4562 references, 101 full text articles were reviewed. Of these, 16 studies conducted in an insurance setting and seven in a research setting, performed in 12 countries, met the inclusion criteria. Studies in the insurance setting were conducted with medical experts assessing claimants who were actual disability claimants or played by actors, hypothetical cases, or short written scenarios. Conditions were mental (n=6, 38%), musculoskeletal (n=4, 25%), or mixed (n=6, 38%). Applicability of findings from studies conducted in an insurance setting to real life evaluations ranged from generalisable (n=7, 44%) and probably generalisable (n=3, 19%) to probably not generalisable (n=6, 37%). Median inter-rater reliability among experts was 0.45 (range intraclass correlation coefficient 0.86 to κ-0.10). Inter-rater reliability was poor in six studies (37%) and excellent in only two (13%). This contrasts with studies conducted in the research setting, where the median inter-rater reliability was 0.76 (range 0.91-0.53), and 71% (5/7) studies achieved excellent inter-rater reliability. Reliability between assessing professionals was higher when the evaluation was guided by a standardised instrument (23 studies, P=0.006). No such association was detected for subjective or chronic health conditions or the studies' generalisability to real world evaluation of disability (P=0.46, 0.45, and 0.65, respectively).Conclusions Despite their common use and far reaching consequences for workers claiming disabling injury or illness, research on the reliability of medical evaluations of disability for work is limited and indicates high variation in judgments among assessing professionals. Standardising the evaluation process could improve reliability. Development and testing of instruments and structured approaches to improve reliability in evaluation of disability are urgently needed.

Project description:Objectives: It has been recommended that clinical trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) would be more ecologically valid if its characteristic mode of diagnostic reasoning were integrated into their design. In that context, however, it is also widely held that demonstrating a high level of agreement on initial TCM diagnoses is necessary for the replicability that the biomedical paradigm requires for the conclusions from such trials. Our aim was to review, summarize, and critique quantitative experimental studies of inter-rater agreement in TCM, and some of their underlying assumptions. Design: Systematic electronic searches were conducted for articles that reported a quantitative measure of inter-rater agreement across a number of rating choices based on examinations of human subjects in person by TCM practitioners, and published in English language peer-reviewed journals. Publications in languages other than English were not included, nor those appearing in other than peer-reviewed journals. Predefined categories of information were extracted from full texts by two investigators working independently. Each article was scored for methodological quality. Outcome measures: Design features across all studies and levels of inter-rater agreement across studies that reported the same type of outcome statistic were compared. Results: Twenty-one articles met inclusion criteria. Fourteen assessed inter-rater agreement on TCM diagnoses, two on diagnostic signs found upon traditional TCM examination, and five on novel rating schemes derived from TCM theory and practice. Raters were students of TCM colleges or graduates of TCM training programs with 3 or more years experience and licensure. Type of outcome statistic varied. Mean rates of pairwise agreement averaged 57% (median 65, range 19-96) across the 9 studies reporting them. Mean Cohen's kappa averaged 0.34 (median 0.34, range 0.07-0.59) across the seven studies reporting them. Meta-analysis was not possible due to variations in study design and outcome statistics. High risks of bias and confounding, and deficits in statistical reporting were common. Conclusions: With a few exceptions, the levels of agreement were low to moderate. Most studies had significant deficits of both methodology and reporting. Results overall suggest a few design features that might contribute to higher levels of agreement. These should be studied further with better experimental controls and more thorough reporting of outcomes. In addition, methods of complex systems analysis should be explored to more adequately model the relationship between clinical outcomes, and the series of diagnoses and treatments that are the norm in actual TCM practice.

Dataset Information

Inter-Rater Agreement between Trachoma Graders: Comparison of Grades Given in Field Conditions versus Grades from Photographic Review.

Publications

Inter-Rater Agreement between Trachoma Graders: Comparison of Grades Given in Field Conditions versus Grades from Photographic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets