Literature DB >> 15570569

Assessing intra, inter and total agreement with replicated readings.

Huiman X Barnhart1, Jingli Song, Michael J Haber.   

Abstract

In clinical studies, assessing agreement of multiple readings on the same subject plays an important role in the evaluation of continuous measurement scale. The multiple readings within a subject may be replicated readings by using the same method or/and readings by using several methods (e.g. different technologies or several raters). The traditional agreement data for a given subject often consist of either replicated readings from only one method or multiple readings from several methods where only one reading is taken from each of these methods. In the first case, only intra-method agreement can be evaluated. In the second case, traditional agreement indices such as intra-class correlation (ICC) or concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) is often reported as inter-method agreement. We argue that these indices are in fact measures of total agreement that contains both inter and intra agreement. Only if there are replicated readings from several methods for a given subject, then one can assess intra, inter and total agreement simultaneously. In this paper, we present new inter-method agreement index, inter-CCC, and total agreement index, total-CCC, for agreement data with replicated readings from several methods where the ICCs within methods are used to assess intra-method agreement for each of the several methods. The relationship of the total-CCC with the inter-CCC and the ICCs is investigated. We propose a generalized estimating equations approach for estimation and inference. Simulation studies are conducted to assess the performance of the proposed approach and data from a carotid stenosis screening study is used for illustration. Copyright (c) 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15570569      PMCID: PMC1653479          DOI: 10.1002/sim.2006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  8 in total

Review 1.  Modelling method comparison data.

Authors:  G Dunn; C Roberts
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Modeling concordance correlation via GEE to evaluate reproducibility.

Authors:  H X Barnhart; J M Williamson
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Overall concordance correlation coefficient for evaluating agreement among multiple observers.

Authors:  Huiman X Barnhart; Michael Haber; Jingli Song
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 4.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability.

Authors:  P E Shrout; J L Fleiss
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 17.737

5.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.

Authors:  L I Lin
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes.

Authors:  S L Zeger; K Y Liang
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Correlated binary regression with covariates specific to each binary observation.

Authors:  R L Prentice
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability.

Authors:  J J Bartko
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  1966-08
  8 in total
  9 in total

1.  Evaluating variability in tumor measurements from same-day repeat CT scans of patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Binsheng Zhao; Leonard P James; Chaya S Moskowitz; Pingzhen Guo; Michelle S Ginsberg; Robert A Lefkowitz; Yilin Qin; Gregory J Riely; Mark G Kris; Lawrence H Schwartz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Concordance of MEG and fMRI patterns in adolescents during verb generation.

Authors:  Yingying Wang; Scott K Holland; Jennifer Vannest
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2012-02-09       Impact factor: 3.252

3.  Overall indices for assessing agreement among multiple raters.

Authors:  Jeong Hoon Jang; Amita K Manatunga; Andrew T Taylor; Qi Long
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  The total deviation index estimated by tolerance intervals to evaluate the concordance of measurement devices.

Authors:  Geòrgia Escaramís; Carlos Ascaso; Josep L Carrasco
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research.

Authors:  Edwin J Lai; Audrey H Calderwood; Gheorghe Doros; Oren K Fix; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-01-10       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Assessing method agreement for paired repeated binary measurements administered by multiple raters.

Authors:  Wei Wang; Nan Lin; Jordan D Oberhaus; Michael S Avidan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Evaluating intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility in histometric measurement: one-wall intrabony periodontal defects in beagle dogs.

Authors:  Soo-Kyung Kim; Eun-Hee Choi; Jung-Seok Lee; Tae-Gyun Kim; Seong-Ho Choi; Kyoo-Sung Cho; Jung-Kiu Chai; Chong-Kwan Kim
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2010-08-30       Impact factor: 2.614

Review 8.  Added value of double reading in diagnostic radiology,a systematic review.

Authors:  Håkan Geijer; Mats Geijer
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2018-03-28

9.  Agreement between Heart Failure Patients and Their Primary Caregivers on Symptom Assessment.

Authors:  Hassan Sharifi; Mohammad Ali Rezaei; Nastaran Heydari Khayat; Neda Mohammadinia
Journal:  Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery       Date:  2018-01
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.