[Assessment of clinical assessment reliability among researchers of a multicenter clinical trial].

E Baca-García, C Díaz-Sastre, F Rico, J Sáiz Ruiz
{"title":"[Assessment of clinical assessment reliability among researchers of a multicenter clinical trial].","authors":"E Baca-García,&nbsp;C Díaz-Sastre,&nbsp;F Rico,&nbsp;J Sáiz Ruiz","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Interater agreement is a main aspect in the planning and conducting a clinical trial. The objective of this study is to show the application of assessing levels of interexaminer's agreement when multiple ratings are made on a single subject as an efficient method of evaluating the interater's reliability in planning a multicenter clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>39 psychiatrist assessed videotape of a patient with depression. The use of any reliability statistics is failed in the analysis of multiple independent ratings of a single subject since we used the methodology proposed by Cichetti et al. This method is able to identify raters whose ratings differ significantly from the average ratings and is sensitive for different levels of agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interarter agreement was between good and excellent. The raters show an adequate agreement in total and items scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The design proposed permits evaluate the interater agreement in an efficient way (only in one session).</p>","PeriodicalId":75429,"journal":{"name":"Actas luso-espanolas de neurologia, psiquiatria y ciencias afines","volume":"26 6","pages":"358-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Actas luso-espanolas de neurologia, psiquiatria y ciencias afines","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

Abstract

Introduction: Interater agreement is a main aspect in the planning and conducting a clinical trial. The objective of this study is to show the application of assessing levels of interexaminer's agreement when multiple ratings are made on a single subject as an efficient method of evaluating the interater's reliability in planning a multicenter clinical trial.

Method: 39 psychiatrist assessed videotape of a patient with depression. The use of any reliability statistics is failed in the analysis of multiple independent ratings of a single subject since we used the methodology proposed by Cichetti et al. This method is able to identify raters whose ratings differ significantly from the average ratings and is sensitive for different levels of agreement.

Results: Interarter agreement was between good and excellent. The raters show an adequate agreement in total and items scores.

Conclusion: The design proposed permits evaluate the interater agreement in an efficient way (only in one session).

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[多中心临床试验研究人员临床评估可靠性的评估]。
相互间的协议是临床试验计划和实施的一个重要方面。本研究的目的是展示在对单个受试者进行多个评级时,评估中间审查员同意水平的应用,作为评估中间审查员在计划多中心临床试验中的可靠性的有效方法。方法:39名精神科医生对一名抑郁症患者的录像进行评估。由于我们使用了Cichetti等人提出的方法,因此在分析单个受试者的多个独立评级时,使用任何信度统计都是失败的。该方法能够识别评分与平均评分有显著差异的评分者,并且对不同程度的一致性很敏感。结果:内部一致性为“好”和“优”。评分者在总分和分项得分上表现出充分的一致。结论:所提出的设计允许以一种有效的方式(仅在一次会话中)评估交互协议。
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
[Benzodiazepines in the treatment of schizophrenia: a review]. [Psychiatric symptoms in Cushing syndrome: a clinical case]. [Apolipoproteins and cognitive deterioration]. [Normative data for the neuropsychological evaluation of intravenous drug users]. [Importance of the early diagnosis of malignant neuroleptic syndrome: report of 2 cases].
×
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