尺侧方差。三种不同测量方法的可靠性。

IF 1.3 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Journal of Clinical Imaging Science Pub Date : 2025-08-12 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.25259/JCIS_49_2024
Asger Jepsen, Benjamin S Rasmussen, Ole Graumann, Meinhard Reinert Hansen, Hans B Tromborg, Janni Jensen
{"title":"尺侧方差。三种不同测量方法的可靠性。","authors":"Asger Jepsen, Benjamin S Rasmussen, Ole Graumann, Meinhard Reinert Hansen, Hans B Tromborg, Janni Jensen","doi":"10.25259/JCIS_49_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Ulnar variance (UV), i.e., the length of the ulna relative to the radius is a radiographic measurement commonly used to estimate fracture compression of distal radius fractures. Different methods for measuring UV have been described in the literature. The aim of this study was to assess the inter- and intra-rater reliability of three different methods of measuring UV among raters with different professional backgrounds and levels of experience.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Nine raters, one musculoskeletal radiologist, three radiology residents, one PhD student, one medical student, and three reporting radiographers, participated in the study. They measured UV on 21 radiographs using three different measurement methods: The method of central reference point (CRP), the lateral method (LM), and the method of perpendiculars (MoP). Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), while intra-rater agreement was estimated using Bland-Altman (BA) analysis with limits of agreement (LoA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Inter-rater reliability estimated by ICCs was 0.91, 0.96, and 0.97 for the methods of CRP, LM, and MoP, respectively. Intra-rater agreement, assessed by BA LoA for rater1/rater2, was ±2.94/±1.45, ±1.92/±2.36, and ±2.14/±1.33 for the methods of CRP, LM, and MoP, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All three methods of measurement displayed excellent reliability with ICCs ranging from 0.91 to 0.97. The findings suggest that UV measurements can be reliably obtained across raters with different professional backgrounds and levels of experience using all three methods of measuring.</p>","PeriodicalId":15512,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science","volume":"15 ","pages":"30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12477954/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ulnar variance - Reliability of three different methods of measurement.\",\"authors\":\"Asger Jepsen, Benjamin S Rasmussen, Ole Graumann, Meinhard Reinert Hansen, Hans B Tromborg, Janni Jensen\",\"doi\":\"10.25259/JCIS_49_2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Ulnar variance (UV), i.e., the length of the ulna relative to the radius is a radiographic measurement commonly used to estimate fracture compression of distal radius fractures. Different methods for measuring UV have been described in the literature. The aim of this study was to assess the inter- and intra-rater reliability of three different methods of measuring UV among raters with different professional backgrounds and levels of experience.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Nine raters, one musculoskeletal radiologist, three radiology residents, one PhD student, one medical student, and three reporting radiographers, participated in the study. They measured UV on 21 radiographs using three different measurement methods: The method of central reference point (CRP), the lateral method (LM), and the method of perpendiculars (MoP). Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), while intra-rater agreement was estimated using Bland-Altman (BA) analysis with limits of agreement (LoA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Inter-rater reliability estimated by ICCs was 0.91, 0.96, and 0.97 for the methods of CRP, LM, and MoP, respectively. Intra-rater agreement, assessed by BA LoA for rater1/rater2, was ±2.94/±1.45, ±1.92/±2.36, and ±2.14/±1.33 for the methods of CRP, LM, and MoP, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All three methods of measurement displayed excellent reliability with ICCs ranging from 0.91 to 0.97. The findings suggest that UV measurements can be reliably obtained across raters with different professional backgrounds and levels of experience using all three methods of measuring.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12477954/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_49_2024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_49_2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:尺骨方差(Ulnar variance, UV),即尺骨相对于桡骨的长度,是一种常用的影像学测量方法,用于评估桡骨远端骨折的骨折压缩性。文献中描述了测量紫外线的不同方法。本研究的目的是评估三种不同的测量紫外线的方法在不同专业背景和经验水平的评分者之间的信度。材料与方法:9名评分员、1名肌肉骨骼放射科医师、3名住院医师、1名博士生、1名医学生和3名报告放射技师参与研究。他们用三种不同的测量方法测量了21张x光片上的紫外线:中心参考点法(CRP)、横向法(LM)和垂线法(MoP)。使用类内相关系数(ICC)评估了等级间的信度,而使用带有一致性限(LoA)的Bland-Altman (BA)分析估计了等级间的一致性。结果:ICCs估计CRP、LM和MoP方法的评分间信度分别为0.91、0.96和0.97。通过BA LoA评估的rater1/rater2的评分一致性,CRP、LM和MoP方法的评分一致性分别为±2.94/±1.45、±1.92/±2.36和±2.14/±1.33。结论:三种测量方法均具有良好的信度,ICCs范围为0.91 ~ 0.97。研究结果表明,使用所有三种测量方法,具有不同专业背景和经验水平的评分者都可以可靠地获得紫外线测量值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ulnar variance - Reliability of three different methods of measurement.

Objectives: Ulnar variance (UV), i.e., the length of the ulna relative to the radius is a radiographic measurement commonly used to estimate fracture compression of distal radius fractures. Different methods for measuring UV have been described in the literature. The aim of this study was to assess the inter- and intra-rater reliability of three different methods of measuring UV among raters with different professional backgrounds and levels of experience.

Material and methods: Nine raters, one musculoskeletal radiologist, three radiology residents, one PhD student, one medical student, and three reporting radiographers, participated in the study. They measured UV on 21 radiographs using three different measurement methods: The method of central reference point (CRP), the lateral method (LM), and the method of perpendiculars (MoP). Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), while intra-rater agreement was estimated using Bland-Altman (BA) analysis with limits of agreement (LoA).

Results: Inter-rater reliability estimated by ICCs was 0.91, 0.96, and 0.97 for the methods of CRP, LM, and MoP, respectively. Intra-rater agreement, assessed by BA LoA for rater1/rater2, was ±2.94/±1.45, ±1.92/±2.36, and ±2.14/±1.33 for the methods of CRP, LM, and MoP, respectively.

Conclusion: All three methods of measurement displayed excellent reliability with ICCs ranging from 0.91 to 0.97. The findings suggest that UV measurements can be reliably obtained across raters with different professional backgrounds and levels of experience using all three methods of measuring.

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
Journal of Clinical Imaging Science
Journal of Clinical Imaging Science RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Imaging Science (JCIS) is an open access peer-reviewed journal committed to publishing high-quality articles in the field of Imaging Science. The journal aims to present Imaging Science and relevant clinical information in an understandable and useful format. The journal is owned and published by the Scientific Scholar. Audience Our audience includes Radiologists, Researchers, Clinicians, medical professionals and students. Review process JCIS has a highly rigorous peer-review process that makes sure that manuscripts are scientifically accurate, relevant, novel and important. Authors disclose all conflicts, affiliations and financial associations such that the published content is not biased.
×
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