The interrater reliability of physical signs in patients with eating disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the interrater reliability of five common signs of eating disorders. METHODS: Eating disorder patients with anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and eating disorders not otherwise specified (ED-NOS), at various stages of recovery, were evaluated for the presence or absence of lanugo hair, acrocyanosis, parotid hypertrophy, hypercarotinemia, and Russell's sign. Patients were examined by two physicians with similar experience and training. Results are analyzed for reliability using the kappa statistic. RESULTS: Kappa scores were as follows, indicating marginal reproducibility of results: lanugo hair (kappa = 0.606), acrocyanosis (kappa = 0.014), parotid hypertrophy (kappa = 0.266), hypercarotinemia (kappa = 0.101) , and Russell's sign (kappa = 0.140). CONCLUSION: The interrater reliability for individual items ranged from poor to moderate. Overall, there is marginal interrater reliability for the five common signs of eating disorders assessed.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".