{"title":"Inter-rater reliability of symptom repertorisation: a pragmatic empirical study","authors":"AJ Vickers, RA van Haselen , L Pang, S Berkovitz","doi":"10.1054/homp.1999.0414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Objective: To determine the extent to which two homeopaths agree on whether symptoms reported by patients in a proving are possibly associated with Mercurius solubilis.</p><p>Design: Blinded, inter-rater reliability study.</p><p>Participants: 104 subjects in a randomised, double-blind mercury proving.</p><p>Outcome measures: 557 symptom episodes spontaneously reported by subjects were classified as ‘mercury’ or ‘not mercury’ by two homeopaths working blind to each other's conclusions and to patient allocation.</p><p>Results: Initial agreement between homeopaths was 70.2%, a kappa of 0.39, (95% CI 0.31, 0.47). Some disagreements appear to have resulted from differing interpretations of the study instructions. After suitable correction, agreement was 76.5% and kappa 0.56 (95% CI 0.49, 0.63).</p><p>Conclusions: The study homeopaths had only a moderate level degree of agreement greater than that expected by chance. The main factor seems to have been differences between data from different sources. There is an urgent need for more research on the methods of choosing homoeopathic medicines in order to improve the reliability and validity of homoeopathic diagnoses.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100201,"journal":{"name":"British Homoeopathic Journal","volume":"89 4","pages":"Pages 188-190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1054/homp.1999.0414","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Homoeopathic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475491699904149","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Abstract
Objective: To determine the extent to which two homeopaths agree on whether symptoms reported by patients in a proving are possibly associated with Mercurius solubilis.
Design: Blinded, inter-rater reliability study.
Participants: 104 subjects in a randomised, double-blind mercury proving.
Outcome measures: 557 symptom episodes spontaneously reported by subjects were classified as ‘mercury’ or ‘not mercury’ by two homeopaths working blind to each other's conclusions and to patient allocation.
Results: Initial agreement between homeopaths was 70.2%, a kappa of 0.39, (95% CI 0.31, 0.47). Some disagreements appear to have resulted from differing interpretations of the study instructions. After suitable correction, agreement was 76.5% and kappa 0.56 (95% CI 0.49, 0.63).
Conclusions: The study homeopaths had only a moderate level degree of agreement greater than that expected by chance. The main factor seems to have been differences between data from different sources. There is an urgent need for more research on the methods of choosing homoeopathic medicines in order to improve the reliability and validity of homoeopathic diagnoses.
目的:确定两名顺势疗法医生在证明患者报告的症状是否可能与溶汞有关方面的一致程度。设计:盲法、评估者间信度研究。参与者:104名随机双盲汞试验受试者。结果测量:两名顺势疗法医生对彼此的结论和患者分配一无所知,将受试者自发报告的557次症状发作归类为“汞”或“非汞”。结果:顺势疗法患者之间的初始一致性为70.2%,kappa为0.39 (95% CI 0.31, 0.47)。一些分歧似乎是由于对学习说明的不同解释造成的。经过适当的校正后,一致性为76.5%,kappa为0.56 (95% CI 0.49, 0.63)。结论:研究中顺势疗法医师的一致性仅为中等程度,高于偶然预期。主要因素似乎是来自不同来源的数据之间的差异。为了提高顺势疗法诊断的信度和效度,迫切需要对顺势药物的选择方法进行更多的研究。