Intra-rater reliability

About: Intra-rater reliability is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2073 publications have been published within this topic receiving 140968 citations.

The unified dyskinesia rating scale: Presentation and clinimetric profile

Abstract: We developed and tested a rating scale aimed to capture the essential features of dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease (PD). Although several scales assess selected attributes of PD-dyskinesias, no comprehensive rating tool exists. Available rating scales were evaluated by the investigators and patient focus groups. Modifications were finalized into the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS). The UDysRS has four parts: I: Historical Disability (patient perceptions) of On-Dyskinesia impact (maximum 44 points); II: Historical Disability (patient perceptions) of Off-Dystonia impact (maximum 16 points); III: Objective Impairment (dyskinesia severity, anatomical distribution over seven body regions, and type (choreic or dystonic) based on four activities observed or video-recorded (28 points); IV: Objective Disability based on Part III activities (maximum 16 points). For clinimetric testing, 70 PD patients with all severities of dyskinesia were interviewed and videotaped. Twenty movement disorder experts rated the videotapes with the UDysRS. Internal consistency was examined with Cronbach's alpha. Inter- and intra-rater reliability was evaluated with generalized weighted and nonweighted Kappa coefficients, and intraclass correlation coefficients. Both subjective (Sections I and II) and objective (Sections III and IV) demonstrated high internal consistency (alpha: 0.915, 0.971). Interrater reliability for the objective sections was acceptable for all items and likewise for intrarater reliability except for right leg. Reliable factor structures were found for both subjective (six factors) and objective sections (five factors). The UDysRS is a clinimetrically sound rating scale for dyskinesia in PD, demonstrating acceptable levels of internal consistency and inter- and intra-rater reliability. Testing scale responsivity to treatment interventions is planned.

Reliability in Automotive and Mechanical Engineering: Determination of Component and System Reliability

Abstract: Introduction.- Fundamentals of Statistics and Probability Theory.- Reliability Analysis of Transmission.- FMEA - Failure Mode and Effects Analysis.- Fault Tree Analysis, FTA.- Assessment of Lifetime Tests and Failure Statistics.- Weibull Parameters for Selected Machine Components.- Methods for Reliability Test Planning.- Lifetime Calculation for Machine Components.- Maintenance and Reliability.- Reliability Assurance Program.- Solutions.- Appendix.- Index.

The L Test of Functional Mobility: Measurement Properties of a Modified Version of the Timed “Up & Go” Test Designed for People With Lower-Limb Amputations

Abstract: Background and Purpose. Walk tests provide essential outcome information when assessing ambulation of individuals with lower-limb amputation and a prosthetic device. Existing tests have limitations such as ceiling effects or insufficient challenge. The objective of this study was to assess the reliability and validity of data for a clinical measure of basic mobility, the L Test of Functional Mobility (L Test). Subjects. For this methodological study, 93 people with unilateral amputations (74% transtibial, 26% transfemoral; 78% male, 22% female; mean age=55.9 years) were consecutively recruited from an outpatient clinic. Twenty-seven subjects returned for retesting. Methods. To assess concurrent validity, subjects completed the L Test, Timed “Up & Go” Test (TUG), 10-Meter Walk Test, and 2-Minute Walk Test, followed by the Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale, Frenchay Activities Index (FAI), and mobility subscale of the Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ-MS). Amputation cause and level, walking aid use, automatic stepping, and age variables were used to assess discriminant validity. Results. Intraclass correlation coefficients were .96 for interrater reliability and .97 for intrarater reliability, and minimal bias existed upon retesting. The magnitude of concurrent validity correlations ( r ) was very high between the L Test data and data for other walk tests and fair to moderate between the L Test data and data for self-report measures. The L Test discriminated between all groups as hypothesized. Discussion and Conclusion. The L Test is a 20-m test of basic mobility skills that includes 2 transfers and 4 turns. It demonstrated excellent measurement properties in this study.

Reliability and responsiveness of the Barry-Albright Dystonia Scale.

Abstract: The reliability and responsiveness of the Barry-Albright Dystonia (BAD) Scale, a 5-point ordinal severity scale for secondary dystonia, was assessed. For interrater reliability, 13 raters scored 10 videotaped patients; for intrarater reliability, two raters rated the videotape again. For test-retest reliability, patients were rated on two occasions. Four inexperienced raters scored patients, received training, then scored additional patients. To assess responsiveness, we compared patient and physician global ratings of change (better, same, and worse) with BAD Scale score changes for 18 patients on intrathecal baclofen (ITB) trials. We assessed reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The mean ICC for total BAD Scale scores were as follows: interrater reliability 0.866, intrarater reliability 0.967 and 0.978, test-retest reliability 0.978 (before training) and 0.967 (after training). We found the BAD Scale responsive to change, with most improved scores in patients rated by the patient, family, and neurosurgeon as 'better'. The total scores were reliable for experienced raters. We recommend training for clinicians interested in using the scale.

The Abbreviated Injury Scale and Injury Severity Score. Levels of inter- and intrarater reliability.

Abstract: Given the wide usage and proven value of the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) in rating severity of trauma, it is essential that certain reliability issues concerning its application be resolved. This article describes a study designed to address these reliability issues. Each of 15 raters with varying qualifications was asked to identify AIS code injuries sustained by 375 trauma patients admitted to four Baltimore area hospitals. Results showed that as a group, physicians and nurses tend to be more reliable in their ratings than either emergency medical technicians (EMTs) or nonclinical technicians, although a research assistant who is well trained in AIS coding and is a diligent worker can use the AIS to code severity as reliably as the physicians when sufficient information is provided in the medical chart. Reliability of AIS scoring was somewhat higher for blunt (vehicular and nonvehicular) versus penetrating injuries.