Literature DB >> 35922640

The interobserver reliability of clinical relevance in orthopaedic research.

Katya E Strage1, Stephen C Stacey1, Cyril Mauffrey1, Joshua A Parry2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A ratio of observed difference (OD) over the 95% confidence interval (CI) has been shown to be strongly associated with the perceived clinical relevance (CR) of medical research results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between the OD/CI ratio and perceived CR in orthopaedic research.
METHODS: Sixty-seven orthopaedic surgeons completed a survey with 15 study outcomes (mean difference and CI) and were asked if they perceived the findings as clinically relevant. The interobserver reliability of perceived CR and the association between CR and the OD/CI ratio and p-value were assessed.
RESULTS: The interobserver reliability of CR between respondents was moderate (kappa = 0.46, CI 0.45 to 0.48). P-values did not differ between results with and without CR (median difference (MD) - 0.12, CI - 0.74 to 0.0009, p = 0.07). The OD/CI ratio, however, was greater for results with CR (MD 1.01, CI 0.3 to 3.9, p = 0.004). The area under the curve (AUC) for the p-value and OD/CI ratio receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was 0.80 (p = 0.01) and 0.97 (p = 0.0003). The cutoff p -value and OD/CI ratio that maximized the sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) for CR were 0.001 (SN 80%, SP 80%) and 0.84 (SN 100%, SP 90%). The SN and SP of a p-value cutoff of 0.05 was 100% and 50%.
CONCLUSION: The interobserver reliability of the perceived CR of orthopaedic research findings was moderate. The OD/CI ratio, in contrast to the p-value, was strongly associated with perceived CR making it a potentially useful measure to evaluate research results.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical relevance; Confidence interval; Effect size; Observed difference; Orthopaedics

Year:  2022        PMID: 35922640     DOI: 10.1007/s00590-022-03346-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol        ISSN: 1633-8065


  7 in total

Review 1.  On effect size.

Authors:  Ken Kelley; Kristopher J Preacher
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2012-04-30

2.  Using Effect Size-or Why the P Value Is Not Enough.

Authors:  Gail M Sullivan; Richard Feinn
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2012-09

3.  On the use of partial area under the ROC curve for comparison of two diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Hua Ma; Andriy I Bandos; David Gur
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2014-12-23       Impact factor: 2.207

Review 4.  Improvement of research quality in the fields of orthopaedics and trauma: a global perspective.

Authors:  Hangama C Fayaz; Norbert Haas; James Kellam; Suthorn Bavonratanavech; Javad Parvizi; George Dyer; Tim Pohlemann; Jörg Jerosch; Karl-Josef Prommersberger; Hans Christoph Pape; Malcolm Smith; Marc Vrahas; Carsten Perka; Klaus Siebenrock; Bassem Elhassan; Christopher Moran; Jesse B Jupiter
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Calculation of Confidence Intervals for Differences in Medians Between Groups and Comparison of Methods.

Authors:  Steven J Staffa; David Zurakowski
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  The interobserver reliability of clinical relevance in medical research.

Authors:  Katya Strage; Stephen Stacey; Cyril Mauffrey; Joshua A Parry
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 7.  Alternatives to P value: confidence interval and effect size.

Authors:  Dong Kyu Lee
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2016-10-25
  7 in total
  1 in total

1.  Pelvic ring injuries after road and mountain bike accidents.

Authors:  Naomi Kelley; Nicholas J Tucker; Cyril Mauffrey; Joshua A Parry
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-08-27
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.