MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1855839624 · doi:10.5858/2003-127-0593-iaivut

Interobserver and Intraobserver Variability Using the Fuhrman Grading System for Renal Cell Carcinoma

2003· article· en· W1855839624 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGrading (engineering)Renal cell carcinomaCarcinomaNuclear medicineTumor gradeRadiologyPredictive valuePathologyInternal medicineImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Histologic grading of renal cell carcinoma has been shown to be second to staging in prognostic significance. A 4-tier grading scheme proposed by Fuhrman et al and based on nuclear features is the system used most frequently in North America. There are, however, very few studies in the literature assessing the interobserver variability for this system, and to our knowledge, none addressing intraobserver variability. OBJECTIVE: To assess the interobserver and intraobserver agreement among 4 pathologists using the Fuhrman nuclear grading scheme for renal cell carcinoma. DESIGN: Representative hematoxylin-eosin-stained slides of 99 consecutive primary renal cell carcinoma cases diagnosed between 1994 and 1999 at St Joseph's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario, were independently graded by 4 pathologists on 2 occasions with a minimum period of 3 months separating the 2 readings. RESULTS: Intraobserver kappa values ranged from 0.29 to 0.62 (mean = 0.45), and interobserver kappa values ranged from 0.19 to 0.38 and from 0.09 to 0.44 for the first and second rounds, respectively (combined mean kappa value = 0.29). When combining Fuhrman grades 1 and 2 as low-grade tumors and grades 3 and 4 as high-grade tumors, the intraobserver kappa values ranged from 0.4 to 0.64 (mean = 0.53) and interobserver kappa values ranged from 0.28 to 0.59 and from 0.26 to 0.58 for the first and second rounds, respectively (combined mean kappa value = 0.45). The admixture of 2 grades in the same tumor was observed in 53% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: We found only moderate intraobserver and interobserver agreement using the 4-grade Fuhrman scheme. After collapsing the diagnostic grades to 2, the intraobserver agreement changed from moderate to substantial. The collapsing of the 4-category Fuhrman grades into 2 categories is useful in improving intraobserver agreement.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it