Topic
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.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: The low reliability of the ESHRE-ESGE system may lead to a lack of consensus about the management of common uterine malformations and biased research interpretations, and the use of the ASRM classification, supplemented with simple morphometric criteria, may be preferred if their sufficient reliability can be confirmed real-time in a large sample size.
27 citations
••
TL;DR: The intrarater reliability between all examiners was high and the inter‐rater reliability was also high, suggesting that the precision of these measurements is acceptable for the use of this method as a measurement tool in clinical practice and research.
Abstract: Pain drawings have frequently been used for clinical information and research. The aim of this study was to investigate intra- and inter-rater reliability of area measurements performed on pain drawings. Our secondary objective was to verify the reliability when using computers with different screen sizes, both with and without mouse hardware. Pain drawings were completed by patients with chronic neck pain or neck-shoulder-arm pain. Four independent examiners participated in the study. Examiners A and B used the same computer with a 16-inch screen and wired mouse hardware. Examiner C used a notebook with a 16-inch screen and no mouse hardware, and Examiner D used a computer with an 11.6-inch screen and a wireless mouse. Image measurements were obtained using GIMP and NIH ImageJ computer programs. The length of all the images was measured using GIMP software to a set scale in ImageJ. Thus, each marked area was encircled and the total surface area (cm(2) ) was calculated for each pain drawing measurement. A total of 117 areas were identified and 52 pain drawings were analyzed. The intrarater reliability between all examiners was high (ICC = 0.989). The inter-rater reliability was also high. No significant differences were observed when using different screen sizes or when using or not using the mouse hardware. This suggests that the precision of these measurements is acceptable for the use of this method as a measurement tool in clinical practice and research.
27 citations
••
TL;DR: The findings indicate that the SLS test including the FSD and LSD tests can be suitable for clinical use regardless of number of observed segments and particularly with a ≤3-point rating scale.
Abstract: Single leg squat (SLS) is a common tool used in clinical examination to set and evaluate rehabilitation goals, but also to assess lower extremity function in active people. Objectives To conduct a review and meta-analysis on the inter-rater and intrarater reliability of the SLS, including the lateral step-down (LSD) and forward step-down (FSD) tests. Design Review with meta-analysis. Data sources CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline (OVID) and Web of Science was searched up until December 2018. Eligibility criteria Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were methodological studies which assessed the inter-rater and/or intrarater reliability of the SLS, FSD and LSD through observation of movement quality. Results Thirty-one studies were included. The reliability varied largely between studies (inter-rater: kappa/intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) = 0.00–0.95; intrarater: kappa/ICC = 0.13–1.00), but most of the studies reached ‘moderate’ measures of agreement. The pooled results of ICC/kappa showed a ‘moderate’ agreement for inter-rater reliability, 0.58 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.65), and a ‘substantial’ agreement for intrarater reliability, 0.68 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.74). Subgroup analyses showed a higher pooled agreement for inter-rater reliability of ≤3-point rating scales while no difference was found for different numbers of segmental assessments. Conclusion Our findings indicate that the SLS test including the FSD and LSD tests can be suitable for clinical use regardless of number of observed segments and particularly with a ≤3-point rating scale. Since most of the included studies were affected with some form of methodological bias, our findings must be interpreted with caution. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018077822.
27 citations
••
TL;DR: The OCRA checklist method, included as a reference method in the ISO and CEN standards regarding upper limb repetitive risk assessment, was in this study investigated regarding its reliability.
27 citations