| Literature DB >> 24831133 |
Huiman X Barnhart1, Eric Yow2, Anna Lisa Crowley2, Melissa A Daubert2, Dawn Rabineau2, Robert Bigelow2, Michael Pencina2, Pamela S Douglas2.
Abstract
Clinical core laboratories, such as Echocardiography core laboratories, are increasingly used in clinical studies with imaging outcomes as primary, secondary, or surrogate endpoints. While many factors contribute to the quality of measurements of imaging variables, an essential step in ensuring the value of imaging data includes formal assessment and control of reproducibility via intra-observer and inter-observer reliability. There are many different agreement/reliability indices in the literature. However, different indices may lead to different conclusions and it is not clear which index is the preferred choice as an overall indication of data quality and a tool for providing guidance on improving quality and reliability in a core lab setting. In this paper, we pre-specify the desirable characteristics of an agreement index for assessing and improving reproducibility in a core lab setting; we compare existing agreement indices in terms of these characteristics to choose a preferred index. We conclude that, among the existing indices reviewed, the coverage probability for assessing agreement is the preferred agreement index on the basis of computational simplicity, its ability for rapid identification of discordant measurements to provide guidance for review and retraining, and its consistent evaluation of data quality across multiple reviewers, populations, and continuous/categorical data.Keywords: agreement; measurement error; method comparison; reliability; reproducibility
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24831133 DOI: 10.1177/0962280214534651
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Stat Methods Med Res ISSN: 0962-2802 Impact factor: 3.021