Good interobserver and intraobserver agreement in the evaluation of the new ILAE classification of focal cortical dysplasias
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: An International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) consensus classification system for focal cortical dysplasias (FCDs) has been published in 2011 specifying clinicopathologic FCD variants. The aim of the present work was to microscopically assess interobserver agreement and intraobserver reproducibility for FCD categories among an international group of neuropathologists with different levels of experience and access to epilepsy surgery tissue. METHODS: Surgical FCD specimens covering a broad histopathology spectrum were retrieved from 22 patients with epilepsy. Three surgical nonepilepsy specimens served as controls. A total of 188 slides with routine or immunohistochemical stainings were digitalized with a slide scanner to allow Internet-based microscopy review. Nine experienced neuropathologists were invited to review these cases twice at a time gap of 3 months and different orders of case presentation. The 2011 ILAE FCD consensus classification served as instruction. Kappa analysis was calculated to estimate interobserver and intraobserver agreement levels. In a third evaluation round, 21 additional neuropathologists with different experience and access to epilepsy surgery reviewed the same case series. KEY FINDINGS: Interobserver agreement was good (κ = 0.6360), with 84% consensus of diagnoses during the first evaluation (21 of 25 cases). Kappa values increased to 0.6532 after reevaluation, and consensus was obtained in 24 (96%) of 25 cases. Overall intraobserver reproducibility was also good (κ = 0.7824, ranging from 0.4991 to 1.000). Fewest changes in the classification were made in the FCD type II group (2.2% of 225 original diagnoses), whereas the majority of changes occurred in FCD type III (13.7% of 225 original diagnoses). In the third evaluation round, interobserver agreement was reflected by the level of experience of each neuropathologist, with κ values ranging from moderate (0.5056; high level of experience >40 cases/year) to low (0.3265; low level of experience <10 cases/year). SIGNIFICANCE: Our study achieved a good and reliable interobserver agreement among the group of expert neuropathologists originally involved in the ILAE FCD consensus classification system. Intraobserver reproducibility in this group was even more robust. These results showed considerable improvement compared to a previous study evaluating the 2004 Palmini FCD classification. Agreement levels were lower in our second group of neuropathologists and were related to their level of access and experience with epilepsy surgery specimens. These results suggested that the more precise ILAE definition of FCD histopathology patterns improves operational procedures in the diagnosis of FCDs. On the other hand, microscopic assessment of FCD is a challenge and requires sustained experience and teaching. The virtual slide review system allowed testing of this hypothesis and reached a widespread group of participating colleagues from different centers all over the world. We propose to further use this tool as a teaching device and also to address other epilepsy-associated entities still difficult to classify such as hippocampal sclerosis, long-term epilepsy-associated tumors, or mild malformations of cortical development (mMCDs), which were not yet covered by current ILAE classification systems.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».