MedElevator
Войти в исследования International journal of cardiology · 2020
The inter-rater reliability and individual reviewer performance of the 2012 world heart federation guidelines for the echocardiographic diagnosis of latent rheumatic heart disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Scheel Amy, Mirabel Mariana, Nunes Maria Carmo Pereira, Okello Emmy, Sarnacki Rachel, Steer Andrew C, Engelman Daniel, Zimmerman Meghan, Zühlke Liesl, Sable Craig, Beaton Andrea
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In 2012, the World Heart Federation (WHF) published guidelines for the echocardiographic diagnosis of rheumatic heart disease (RHD). This study assesses individual reviewer performance and inter-rater agreement and reliability on the presence of any RHD, as well classification of RHD based on the 2012 WHF criteria.
METHODS: Four cardiologists individually reviewed echocardiograms in the context of a randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT03346525) and participated in a blinded adjudication panel. Panel decision was the reference standard for diagnosis. Performance of individual reviewers to panel adjudication was compared through sensitivity and specificity analyses and inter-rater reliability was assessed between individual panelists using Fleiss free marginal multirater kappa.
RESULTS: Echocardiograms from 784 children had two independent reports and panel adjudication. The accuracy of independent reviewers for any RHD had high sensitivity (94%, 95% CI 93-95%) and moderate specificity (62%, 95% CI 53-70%). Sensitivity and specificity for definite RHD was 61.3 (95% CI, 55.3-67.1) and 93.1 (95% CI, 91.6-94.4), with 86.8 (84.7-88.7) and 65.8 (61.0-70.4) for borderline RHD. There was moderate inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.66) on the presence of any RHD while agreement for specific 2012 WHF classification was only fair (κ = 0.51).
CONCLUSIONS: The 2012 WHF guidelines are moderately reproducible when used by expert cardiologists. More cases of RHD were diagnosed by an consensus panel than by individual reviewers. A revision to the criteria is now warranted to further increase the reliability of the WHF criteria.
METHODS: Four cardiologists individually reviewed echocardiograms in the context of a randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT03346525) and participated in a blinded adjudication panel. Panel decision was the reference standard for diagnosis. Performance of individual reviewers to panel adjudication was compared through sensitivity and specificity analyses and inter-rater reliability was assessed between individual panelists using Fleiss free marginal multirater kappa.
RESULTS: Echocardiograms from 784 children had two independent reports and panel adjudication. The accuracy of independent reviewers for any RHD had high sensitivity (94%, 95% CI 93-95%) and moderate specificity (62%, 95% CI 53-70%). Sensitivity and specificity for definite RHD was 61.3 (95% CI, 55.3-67.1) and 93.1 (95% CI, 91.6-94.4), with 86.8 (84.7-88.7) and 65.8 (61.0-70.4) for borderline RHD. There was moderate inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.66) on the presence of any RHD while agreement for specific 2012 WHF classification was only fair (κ = 0.51).
CONCLUSIONS: The 2012 WHF guidelines are moderately reproducible when used by expert cardiologists. More cases of RHD were diagnosed by an consensus panel than by individual reviewers. A revision to the criteria is now warranted to further increase the reliability of the WHF criteria.