Interobserver and intraobserver repeatability of lipid layer pattern evaluation by two experienced observers

C. García-Resúa, Hugo Pena-Verdeal, M. Lira, M. G. Penedo, M. .. Giraldez, E. Yebra-Pimentel
{"title":"Interobserver and intraobserver repeatability of lipid layer pattern evaluation by two experienced observers","authors":"C. García-Resúa, Hugo Pena-Verdeal, M. Lira, M. G. Penedo, M. .. Giraldez, E. Yebra-Pimentel","doi":"10.1117/12.2030432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The lipid layer plays a major role in limiting evaporation of the tear film. Based on interference phenomena, there is a test directed to lipid layer pattern (LLP) evaluation, but is affected by subjective interpretation of the patterns. The aim of this study is to compare the LLP evaluation between two experienced observers on a group of healthy patients. Furthermore, the observers re-evaluated the same images in order to check their individual repeatability. LLP was examined using a Tearscope-plus (Keeler, Windsor, UK) attached to a slit lamp. Tear film was recorded by a Topcon DV-3 digital camera video and LLP images were captured. This yielded 124 LLP images that were categorized (based on Guillon’s schema) by two expert observers in two sessions separated by one month. Interobserver repeatability and intraobserver repeatability between both sessions were studied by using Cohen’s kappa coefficient. Comparing LLP categorization between both observers, Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.615 and 0.633 for first and second session, respectively. When comparing LLP categorization by the same observer between both sessions, Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.770 and 0.812 for Observer 1 and Observer 2. These results indicate substantial correlation in all cases [range of 0.61–0.80]. The most frequent misinterpretations were between open and closed meshwork and Wave and closed meshwork patterns. Although substantial correlation was found between categorizations of experienced observers, misinterpretation of the patters may appear even in the same observer. Some misinterpretations between adjacent patterns could be palliated by including intermediate patterns between those categories.","PeriodicalId":135913,"journal":{"name":"Iberoamerican Meeting of Optics and the Latin American Meeting of Optics, Lasers and Their Applications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iberoamerican Meeting of Optics and the Latin American Meeting of Optics, Lasers and Their Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2030432","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The lipid layer plays a major role in limiting evaporation of the tear film. Based on interference phenomena, there is a test directed to lipid layer pattern (LLP) evaluation, but is affected by subjective interpretation of the patterns. The aim of this study is to compare the LLP evaluation between two experienced observers on a group of healthy patients. Furthermore, the observers re-evaluated the same images in order to check their individual repeatability. LLP was examined using a Tearscope-plus (Keeler, Windsor, UK) attached to a slit lamp. Tear film was recorded by a Topcon DV-3 digital camera video and LLP images were captured. This yielded 124 LLP images that were categorized (based on Guillon’s schema) by two expert observers in two sessions separated by one month. Interobserver repeatability and intraobserver repeatability between both sessions were studied by using Cohen’s kappa coefficient. Comparing LLP categorization between both observers, Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.615 and 0.633 for first and second session, respectively. When comparing LLP categorization by the same observer between both sessions, Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.770 and 0.812 for Observer 1 and Observer 2. These results indicate substantial correlation in all cases [range of 0.61–0.80]. The most frequent misinterpretations were between open and closed meshwork and Wave and closed meshwork patterns. Although substantial correlation was found between categorizations of experienced observers, misinterpretation of the patters may appear even in the same observer. Some misinterpretations between adjacent patterns could be palliated by including intermediate patterns between those categories.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
由两名经验丰富的观察者进行的脂质层模式评估的观察者间和观察者内的可重复性
脂质层在限制泪膜蒸发方面起主要作用。基于干扰现象,有一种针对脂质层模式(LLP)评价的测试,但受到对模式的主观解释的影响。本研究的目的是比较两名经验丰富的观察员对一组健康患者的LLP评估。此外,观察人员重新评估相同的图像,以检查他们的个人重复性。使用Tearscope-plus (Keeler, Windsor, UK)连接裂隙灯检查LLP。用Topcon DV-3型数码相机记录泪膜,并采集泪膜图像。这产生了124张LLP图像,由两位专家观察者在间隔一个月的两次会议中进行分类(基于Guillon的图式)。采用Cohen’s kappa系数研究两组间的观察者间重复性和观察者内重复性。比较两个观察者之间的LLP分类,Cohen的kappa系数分别为0.615和0.633在第一次和第二次会议。当比较两次会议中同一观察者的LLP分类时,观察者1和观察者2的Cohen's kappa系数分别为0.770和0.812。这些结果表明在所有病例中都存在显著相关性[范围为0.61-0.80]。最常见的误解是开放和封闭的网络模式以及波浪和封闭的网络模式之间的误解。尽管在有经验的观察者的分类之间发现了实质性的相关性,但即使在同一观察者身上也可能出现对模式的误解。相邻模式之间的一些误解可以通过包括这些类别之间的中间模式来缓和。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Remote access to an interferometric fringes stabilization active system via RENATA Optical design of a Coudé-Train for a stable and efficient simultaneous feeding of the ESPRESSO spectrograph from the four VLT telescopes Configurable multipulsing of a MOPA pulsed fiber laser with applications in materials processing New method for sub-structured Ronchi rulings generation and his irradiance profile Photorefractive moiré-like patterns with different variation directions for multi-projection in profilometer applications
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1