Dataset Information

Influence of Rater Training on Inter- and Intrarater Reliability When Using the Rat Grimace Scale.

ABSTRACT: Rodent grimace scales facilitate assessment of ongoing pain. Reported rater training using these scales varies considerably and may contribute to the observed variability in interrater reliability. This study evaluated the effect of training on interrater reliability with the Rat Grimace Scale (RGS). Two training sets (42 and 150 images) were prepared from acute pain models. Four trainee raters progressed through 2 rounds of training, scoring 42 images (set 1) followed by 150 images (set 2a). After each round, trainees reviewed the RGS and any problematic images with an experienced rater. The 150 images were then rescored (set 2b). Four years later, trainees rescored the 150 images (set 2c). A second group of raters (no-training group) scored the same image sets without review with the experienced rater. Inter- and intrarater reliability were evaluated by using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and ICC values were compared by using the Feldt test. In the trainee group, interrater reliability increased from moderate to very good between sets 1 and 2b and increased between sets 2a and 2b. Action units with the highest and lowest ICC at set 2b were orbital tightening and whiskers, respectively. In comparison to an experienced rater, the ICC for all trainees improved, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 at set 2b. Four years later, very good interrater reliability was retained, and intrarater reliability was good or very good). The interrater reliability of the no-training group was moderate and did not improve from set 1 to set 2b. Training improved interrater reliability, with an associated reduction in 95%CI. In addition, training improved interrater reliability with an experienced rater, and performance was retained.

SUBMITTER: Zhang EQ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6433356 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Influence of Rater Training on Inter- and Intrarater Reliability When Using the Rat Grimace Scale.

Zhang Emily Q EQ Leung Vivian Sy VS Pang Daniel Sj DS

Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS 20190212 2

Rodent grimace scales facilitate assessment of ongoing pain. Reported rater training using these scales varies considerably and may contribute to the observed variability in interrater reliability. This study evaluated the effect of training on interrater reliability with the Rat Grimace Scale (RGS). Two training sets (42 and 150 images) were prepared from acute pain models. Four trainee raters progressed through 2 rounds of training, scoring 42 images (set 1) followed by 150 images (set 2a). Af ...[more]

PMID: 30755291

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeFirst, to evaluate inter-rater reliability when human raters estimate the reading performance of visually impaired individuals using the MNREAD acuity chart. Second, to evaluate the agreement between computer-based scoring algorithms and compare them with human rating.MethodsReading performance was measured for 101 individuals with low vision, using the Portuguese version of the MNREAD test. Seven raters estimated the maximum reading speed (MRS) and critical print size (CPS) of each individual MNREAD curve. MRS and CPS were also calculated automatically for each curve using two different algorithms: the original standard deviation method (SDev) and a non-linear mixed effects (NLME) modeling. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to estimate absolute agreement between raters and/or algorithms.ResultsAbsolute agreement between raters was 'excellent' for MRS (ICC = 0.97; 95%CI [0.96, 0.98]) and 'moderate' to 'good' for CPS (ICC = 0.77; 95%CI [0.69, 0.83]). For CPS, inter-rater reliability was poorer among less experienced raters (ICC = 0.70; 95%CI [0.57, 0.80]) when compared to experienced ones (ICC = 0.82; 95%CI [0.76, 0.88]). Absolute agreement between the two algorithms was 'excellent' for MRS (ICC = 0.96; 95%CI [0.91, 0.98]). For CPS, the best possible agreement was found for CPS defined as the print size sustaining 80% of MRS (ICC = 0.77; 95%CI [0.68, 0.84]). Absolute agreement between raters and automated methods was 'excellent' for MRS (ICC = 0.96; 95% CI [0.88, 0.98] for SDev; ICC = 0.97; 95% CI [0.95, 0.98] for NLME). For CPS, absolute agreement between raters and SDev ranged from 'poor' to 'good' (ICC = 0.66; 95% CI [0.3, 0.80]), while agreement between raters and NLME was 'good' (ICC = 0.83; 95% CI [0.76, 0.88]).ConclusionFor MRS, inter-rater reliability is excellent, even considering the possibility of noisy and/or incomplete data collected in low-vision individuals. For CPS, inter-rater reliability is lower. This may be problematic, for instance in the context of multisite investigations or follow-up examinations. The NLME method showed better agreement with the raters than the SDev method for both reading parameters. Setting up consensual guidelines to deal with ambiguous curves may help improve reliability. While the exact definition of CPS should be chosen on a case-by-case basis depending on the clinician or researcher's motivations, evidence suggests that estimating CPS as the smallest print size sustaining about 80% of MRS would increase inter-rater reliability.

Dataset Information

Influence of Rater Training on Inter- and Intrarater Reliability When Using the Rat Grimace Scale.

Publications

Influence of Rater Training on Inter- and Intrarater Reliability When Using the Rat Grimace Scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets