评估评分者对血管内泡信号分级的一致性。

Undersea biomedical research Pub Date : 1991-09-01
K D Sawatzky, R Y Nishi
{"title":"评估评分者对血管内泡信号分级的一致性。","authors":"K D Sawatzky,&nbsp;R Y Nishi","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transcutaneous Doppler ultrasonic bubble detectors are widely used in decompression research. However, interpretation of the complex acoustic signals from the bubble detectors involves a degree of subjectivity, and the comparability of grades assigned by different raters must be assessed. Hypothetical data were used to determine an appropriate method for evaluating the comparability of Doppler raters and to illustrate the limitations of many nonparametric statistics. Two sets of real data were then used to evaluate this procedure, the first from a training exercise carried out by Kisman and Masurel (1978, unpublished) and the second from a test tape that was independently scored by five Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine Doppler technicians. The results were analyzed by a two-stage approach. First, they were entered into contingency tables and checked for large disagreements, a tendency for one rater to grade higher than the other, and the degree of variability. Second, the results were analyzed with the nonparametric weighted kappa statistic. These studies have led to a practical, efficient method for the evaluation of Doppler raters.</p>","PeriodicalId":76778,"journal":{"name":"Undersea biomedical research","volume":"18 5-6","pages":"373-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of inter-rater agreement on the grading of intravascular bubble signals.\",\"authors\":\"K D Sawatzky,&nbsp;R Y Nishi\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Transcutaneous Doppler ultrasonic bubble detectors are widely used in decompression research. However, interpretation of the complex acoustic signals from the bubble detectors involves a degree of subjectivity, and the comparability of grades assigned by different raters must be assessed. Hypothetical data were used to determine an appropriate method for evaluating the comparability of Doppler raters and to illustrate the limitations of many nonparametric statistics. Two sets of real data were then used to evaluate this procedure, the first from a training exercise carried out by Kisman and Masurel (1978, unpublished) and the second from a test tape that was independently scored by five Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine Doppler technicians. The results were analyzed by a two-stage approach. First, they were entered into contingency tables and checked for large disagreements, a tendency for one rater to grade higher than the other, and the degree of variability. Second, the results were analyzed with the nonparametric weighted kappa statistic. These studies have led to a practical, efficient method for the evaluation of Doppler raters.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Undersea biomedical research\",\"volume\":\"18 5-6\",\"pages\":\"373-96\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1991-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Undersea biomedical research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Undersea biomedical research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

经皮多普勒超声气泡探测器广泛应用于减压研究。然而,对来自气泡探测器的复杂声学信号的解释涉及一定程度的主观性,并且必须评估由不同评级者分配的等级的可比性。假设数据被用来确定一种合适的方法来评估多普勒评分器的可比性,并说明许多非参数统计的局限性。然后使用两组真实数据来评估这一过程,第一组来自Kisman和Masurel(1978年,未发表)进行的训练演习,第二组来自由五名国防和民用环境医学研究所多普勒技术人员独立评分的测试磁带。结果用两阶段法进行分析。首先,它们被输入到列联表中,检查是否存在较大的分歧,一个评分者比另一个评分者评分更高的趋势,以及变化的程度。其次,采用非参数加权kappa统计量对结果进行分析。这些研究导致了一个实用的,有效的方法来评估多普勒率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of inter-rater agreement on the grading of intravascular bubble signals.

Transcutaneous Doppler ultrasonic bubble detectors are widely used in decompression research. However, interpretation of the complex acoustic signals from the bubble detectors involves a degree of subjectivity, and the comparability of grades assigned by different raters must be assessed. Hypothetical data were used to determine an appropriate method for evaluating the comparability of Doppler raters and to illustrate the limitations of many nonparametric statistics. Two sets of real data were then used to evaluate this procedure, the first from a training exercise carried out by Kisman and Masurel (1978, unpublished) and the second from a test tape that was independently scored by five Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine Doppler technicians. The results were analyzed by a two-stage approach. First, they were entered into contingency tables and checked for large disagreements, a tendency for one rater to grade higher than the other, and the degree of variability. Second, the results were analyzed with the nonparametric weighted kappa statistic. These studies have led to a practical, efficient method for the evaluation of Doppler raters.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信