{"title":"Evaluating Diagnostic Concordance in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Among Academic Glaucoma Subspecialists.","authors":"Chenmin Wang, De-Fu Chen, Xiao Shang, Xiaoyan Wang, Xizhong Chu, Chengju Hu, Qiangjie Huang, Gangwei Cheng, Jianjun Li, Ruiyi Ren, Yuanbo Liang","doi":"10.3390/diagnostics14212460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> The study aimed to evaluate the interobserver agreement among glaucoma subspecialists in diagnosing glaucoma and to explore the causes of diagnostic discrepancies. <b>Methods:</b> Three experienced glaucoma subspecialists independently assessed frequency domain optical coherence tomography, fundus color photographs, and static perimetry results from 464 eyes of 275 participants, adhering to unified glaucoma diagnostic criteria. All data were collected from the Wenzhou Glaucoma Progression Study between August 2014 and June 2021. <b>Results:</b> The overall interobserver agreement among the three experts was poor, with a Fleiss' kappa value of 0.149. The kappa values interobserver agreement between pairs of experts ranged from 0.133 to 0.282. In 50 cases, or approximately 10.8%, the three experts reached completely different diagnoses. Agreement was more likely in cases involving larger average cup-to-disc ratios, greater vertical cup-to-disc ratios, more severe visual field defects, and thicker retinal nerve fiber layer measurements, particularly in the temporal and inferior quadrants. High myopia also negatively impacted interobserver agreement. <b>Conclusions:</b> Despite using unified diagnostic criteria for glaucoma, significant differences in interobserver consistency persist among glaucoma subspecialists. To improve interobserver agreement, it is recommended to provide additional training on standardized diagnostic criteria. Furthermore, for cases with inconsistent diagnoses, long-term follow-up is essential to confirm the diagnosis of glaucoma.</p>","PeriodicalId":11225,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostics","volume":"14 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11545022/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14212460","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the interobserver agreement among glaucoma subspecialists in diagnosing glaucoma and to explore the causes of diagnostic discrepancies. Methods: Three experienced glaucoma subspecialists independently assessed frequency domain optical coherence tomography, fundus color photographs, and static perimetry results from 464 eyes of 275 participants, adhering to unified glaucoma diagnostic criteria. All data were collected from the Wenzhou Glaucoma Progression Study between August 2014 and June 2021. Results: The overall interobserver agreement among the three experts was poor, with a Fleiss' kappa value of 0.149. The kappa values interobserver agreement between pairs of experts ranged from 0.133 to 0.282. In 50 cases, or approximately 10.8%, the three experts reached completely different diagnoses. Agreement was more likely in cases involving larger average cup-to-disc ratios, greater vertical cup-to-disc ratios, more severe visual field defects, and thicker retinal nerve fiber layer measurements, particularly in the temporal and inferior quadrants. High myopia also negatively impacted interobserver agreement. Conclusions: Despite using unified diagnostic criteria for glaucoma, significant differences in interobserver consistency persist among glaucoma subspecialists. To improve interobserver agreement, it is recommended to provide additional training on standardized diagnostic criteria. Furthermore, for cases with inconsistent diagnoses, long-term follow-up is essential to confirm the diagnosis of glaucoma.
DiagnosticsBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
2699
审稿时长
19.64 days
期刊介绍:
Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418) is an international scholarly open access journal on medical diagnostics. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications and short notes on the research and development of medical diagnostics. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and/or methodological details must be provided for research articles.