评价法国中毒控制中心设计和应用的中毒因果关系评估方法的可重复性和有效性。

IF 3.3
Sandra Sinno-Tellier, Dorian Délepine, Dominique Vodovar, Coralie Bragança, Marie Sponga, Emmanuel Puskarczyk, Ingrid Blanc-Brisset, Fanny Pelissier, Ismaïl Ahmed, Jacques Manel, Juliette Bloch, Alexis Descatha
{"title":"评价法国中毒控制中心设计和应用的中毒因果关系评估方法的可重复性和有效性。","authors":"Sandra Sinno-Tellier, Dorian Délepine, Dominique Vodovar, Coralie Bragança, Marie Sponga, Emmanuel Puskarczyk, Ingrid Blanc-Brisset, Fanny Pelissier, Ismaïl Ahmed, Jacques Manel, Juliette Bloch, Alexis Descatha","doi":"10.1080/15563650.2025.2515239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>French poison control centres have developed and use a standardised causality assessment method based on a decision tree for poisoning cases involving a wide range of xenobiotics, which includes five ascending levels (I0-I4) and six determinants. This study was designed to evaluate inter-rater reliability and the validity of using this method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A reference group of toxicologists identified five categories of cases - based on the route of exposure with two circumstances for the oral route - recorded in the French National Database of Poisonings. The reference group assessed by consensus the level of causality of each randomly selected case as the reference level. Toxicologists from poison centres, not belonging to the reference group, were selected as raters. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using weighted Light's kappa. The results of raters were compared against the reference to test the validity of the method. A subgroup analysis of inter-rater reliability was also performed according to rater experience, case category, and causality determinant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen raters reviewed the 86 cases selected by the reference group. Kappa was equal to 0.55 (moderate agreement). Sensitivity was 0.90 and specificity was 0.62 when comparing I0 versus I1-I4 classes. The agreement between raters increased with experience except for the most experienced group. Ocular route of exposure had the highest kappa (0.70) among the five case categories. Kappa for the causality determinants varied from 0.31 (exposure) to 0.54 (bibliographical references).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The causality assessment of poisonings was carried out on real-life cases. Our results are close to those of studies on causality methods in pharmacovigilance and nutrivigilance, despite a wider scope of application.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Causality assessment method employed by French poison control centres is useful, although coding of some determinants should be improved. Further refinement of the causality assessment method will also further enhance its utility.</p>","PeriodicalId":520593,"journal":{"name":"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)","volume":" ","pages":"570-578"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the reproducibility and validity of the use of the causality assessment method for poisonings designed and applied by the French poison control centres.\",\"authors\":\"Sandra Sinno-Tellier, Dorian Délepine, Dominique Vodovar, Coralie Bragança, Marie Sponga, Emmanuel Puskarczyk, Ingrid Blanc-Brisset, Fanny Pelissier, Ismaïl Ahmed, Jacques Manel, Juliette Bloch, Alexis Descatha\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15563650.2025.2515239\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>French poison control centres have developed and use a standardised causality assessment method based on a decision tree for poisoning cases involving a wide range of xenobiotics, which includes five ascending levels (I0-I4) and six determinants. This study was designed to evaluate inter-rater reliability and the validity of using this method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A reference group of toxicologists identified five categories of cases - based on the route of exposure with two circumstances for the oral route - recorded in the French National Database of Poisonings. The reference group assessed by consensus the level of causality of each randomly selected case as the reference level. Toxicologists from poison centres, not belonging to the reference group, were selected as raters. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using weighted Light's kappa. The results of raters were compared against the reference to test the validity of the method. A subgroup analysis of inter-rater reliability was also performed according to rater experience, case category, and causality determinant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen raters reviewed the 86 cases selected by the reference group. Kappa was equal to 0.55 (moderate agreement). Sensitivity was 0.90 and specificity was 0.62 when comparing I0 versus I1-I4 classes. The agreement between raters increased with experience except for the most experienced group. Ocular route of exposure had the highest kappa (0.70) among the five case categories. Kappa for the causality determinants varied from 0.31 (exposure) to 0.54 (bibliographical references).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The causality assessment of poisonings was carried out on real-life cases. Our results are close to those of studies on causality methods in pharmacovigilance and nutrivigilance, despite a wider scope of application.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Causality assessment method employed by French poison control centres is useful, although coding of some determinants should be improved. Further refinement of the causality assessment method will also further enhance its utility.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"570-578\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2025.2515239\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2025.2515239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:法国毒物控制中心已经开发并使用了一种标准化的因果关系评估方法,该方法基于涉及多种外源性药物的中毒病例的决策树,其中包括五个上升水平(I0-I4)和六个决定因素。本研究旨在评估该方法的信度及效度。方法:一个毒理学家参考小组确定了五类病例——基于暴露途径和两种口服途径——记录在法国国家中毒数据库中。参照组对随机选取的每个病例的因果关系水平进行一致评估,作为参照水平。来自毒物中心的毒理学家,不属于参照组,被选为评分者。采用加权Light’s kappa法评估评分者间信度。将评分者的结果与参考文献进行比较,以检验方法的有效性。根据评分者经验、病例类别和因果关系决定因素,还进行了评分者间信度的亚组分析。结果:参照组选取86例病例,由19位评议员进行评议。Kappa = 0.55(中度一致)。I0级与I1-I4级的敏感性为0.90,特异性为0.62。除了经验最丰富的一组之外,评分者之间的一致性随着经验的增加而增加。眼部接触途径的kappa值最高,为0.70。因果关系决定因素的Kappa值从0.31(暴露)到0.54(参考书目)不等。讨论:中毒的因果关系评估是在现实案例中进行的。我们的结果与药物警戒和营养警戒的因果关系方法的研究结果接近,尽管应用范围更广。结论:法国毒物控制中心采用的因果关系评价方法是有用的,但一些决定因素的编码有待改进。因果关系评价方法的进一步完善也将进一步提高其实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of the reproducibility and validity of the use of the causality assessment method for poisonings designed and applied by the French poison control centres.

Introduction: French poison control centres have developed and use a standardised causality assessment method based on a decision tree for poisoning cases involving a wide range of xenobiotics, which includes five ascending levels (I0-I4) and six determinants. This study was designed to evaluate inter-rater reliability and the validity of using this method.

Methods: A reference group of toxicologists identified five categories of cases - based on the route of exposure with two circumstances for the oral route - recorded in the French National Database of Poisonings. The reference group assessed by consensus the level of causality of each randomly selected case as the reference level. Toxicologists from poison centres, not belonging to the reference group, were selected as raters. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using weighted Light's kappa. The results of raters were compared against the reference to test the validity of the method. A subgroup analysis of inter-rater reliability was also performed according to rater experience, case category, and causality determinant.

Results: Nineteen raters reviewed the 86 cases selected by the reference group. Kappa was equal to 0.55 (moderate agreement). Sensitivity was 0.90 and specificity was 0.62 when comparing I0 versus I1-I4 classes. The agreement between raters increased with experience except for the most experienced group. Ocular route of exposure had the highest kappa (0.70) among the five case categories. Kappa for the causality determinants varied from 0.31 (exposure) to 0.54 (bibliographical references).

Discussion: The causality assessment of poisonings was carried out on real-life cases. Our results are close to those of studies on causality methods in pharmacovigilance and nutrivigilance, despite a wider scope of application.

Conclusion: Causality assessment method employed by French poison control centres is useful, although coding of some determinants should be improved. Further refinement of the causality assessment method will also further enhance its utility.

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:604180095
Book学术官方微信