MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026827524 · doi:10.1159/000085440

Inter-Rater Reliability of Delirium Rating Scales

2005· review· en· W2026827524 on OpenAlexaff
Ravi Bhat, Kenneth Rockwood

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroepidemiology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumInter-rater reliabilityReliability (semiconductor)Rating scaleMedicineCognitionClinical psychologyPsychiatryPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delirium continues to be under-recognized despite use of rating scales with apparently high inter-rater reliability. We analyzed the inter-reliability data of published rating scales for delirium using a standard questionnaire to evaluate if the inter-rater reliability was assessed rigorously. Most studies employed a heterogeneous group of cognitively disordered elderly, however other aspects of inter-rater reliability estimation were less than rigorous. This suggests that the reported reliability may be spuriously high, which may have implications on the ability of clinicians to discriminate delirium from other causes of cognitive impairment in practice. The methodology of assessing inter-rater reliability of delirium scales needs to improve and reliability should be evaluated when the settings of administration change substantially.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.105
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.105
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroepidemiologySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207