Inter-rater and intrarater reliability of superior labrum anterior to posterior lesion classification using magnetic resonance arthrography
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BackgroundThe glenoid labrum is a fibrocartilaginous ring that affixes the joint capsule and ligaments of the glenohumeral joint. Superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) lesions are a subset of injuries that affect the superior glenoid labrum, most common in laborers and overhead-throwing athletes. In 1990, Snyder et al classified SLAP lesions into one of four types. Later, Maffet et al expanded this scale to include three additional subclassifications. At present, arthroscopy is considered the gold standard for SLAP tear diagnosis. Classification under arthroscopy has demonstrated low to moderate inter-rater reliability. Magnetic resonance arthrography (MRa) is an alternate, less invasive test for diagnosing SLAP lesions. The reliability of MRa for diagnosing slap tears is uncertain.MethodsMagnetic resonance arthrograms were identified using the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS). In total, 273 shoulder arthrograms were reviewed, and 20 were selected with the desired pathology. Three orthopedic surgeons and three musculoskeletal radiologists were asked to classify the SLAP lesions into one of seven categories (Snyder & Maffet classification systems). Data was collected on two separate occasions at an interval of at least two months. Inter-rater and intrarater reliability were calculated using Fleiss Kappa and Cohen's Kappa, respectively.ResultsBetween all raters, there was poor inter-rater reliability for each round of data collection (κ = .177, κ = .124 for rounds 1 and 2, respectively). Between orthopedic surgeons, there were poor levels of agreement (κ = −.056, κ = .114), whereas, between radiologists, there was fair to moderate agreement (κ = 0.479, κ = 0.340). Within orthopedic raters, κ values ranged from −0.059 to 0.125, indicating, at best, poor intrarater reliability. Within radiologists, κ values ranged from 0.545 to 0.553, indicating moderate agreement within raters. The analysis determined that none of the orthopedic values for inter or intrarater reliability could be deemed statistically different from zero.ConclusionOverall, classification using MRa resulted in significant disagreement between and within raters. Trained radiologists demonstrated higher overall levels of agreement than orthopedic surgeons. In summary, when using MRa to assess SLAP lesions, Snyder and Maffet classification demonstrates poor reliability by orthopedic surgeons and moderate reliability when used by musculoskeletal radiologists. The glenoid labrum is a fibrocartilaginous ring that affixes the joint capsule and ligaments of the glenohumeral joint. Superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) lesions are a subset of injuries that affect the superior glenoid labrum, most common in laborers and overhead-throwing athletes. In 1990, Snyder et al classified SLAP lesions into one of four types. Later, Maffet et al expanded this scale to include three additional subclassifications. At present, arthroscopy is considered the gold standard for SLAP tear diagnosis. Classification under arthroscopy has demonstrated low to moderate inter-rater reliability. Magnetic resonance arthrography (MRa) is an alternate, less invasive test for diagnosing SLAP lesions. The reliability of MRa for diagnosing slap tears is uncertain. Magnetic resonance arthrograms were identified using the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS). In total, 273 shoulder arthrograms were reviewed, and 20 were selected with the desired pathology. Three orthopedic surgeons and three musculoskeletal radiologists were asked to classify the SLAP lesions into one of seven categories (Snyder & Maffet classification systems). Data was collected on two separate occasions at an interval of at least two months. Inter-rater and intrarater reliability were calculated using Fleiss Kappa and Cohen's Kappa, respectively. Between all raters, there was poor inter-rater reliability for each round of data collection (κ = .177, κ = .124 for rounds 1 and 2, respectively). Between orthopedic surgeons, there were poor levels of agreement (κ = −.056, κ = .114), whereas, between radiologists, there was fair to moderate agreement (κ = 0.479, κ = 0.340). Within orthopedic raters, κ values ranged from −0.059 to 0.125, indicating, at best, poor intrarater reliability. Within radiologists, κ values ranged from 0.545 to 0.553, indicating moderate agreement within raters. The analysis determined that none of the orthopedic values for inter or intrarater reliability could be deemed statistically different from zero. Overall, classification using MRa resulted in significant disagreement between and within raters. Trained radiologists demonstrated higher overall levels of agreement than orthopedic surgeons. In summary, when using MRa to assess SLAP lesions, Snyder and Maffet classification demonstrates poor reliability by orthopedic surgeons and moderate reliability when used by musculoskeletal radiologists.
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 | 0,000 | 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) | 0,001 | 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 ».