MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075315791 · doi:10.3138/ptc.2013-23

Examining Interrater Reliability and Validity of a Paediatric Cardiopulmonary Physiotherapy Discharge Tool

2014· article· en· W2075315791 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jamil Lati, Vanessa Pellow, Jeannine Sproule, Dina Brooks, Cindy Ellerton

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy Canada · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInter-rater reliabilityPhysical therapyAuscultationRespiratory distressHospital dischargeDischarge planningPediatricsSurgeryIntensive care medicineInternal medicineNursingPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine the interrater reliability (IRR) of the individual items in the Paediatric Cardiopulmonary Physiotherapy (CPT) Discharge Tool. This tool identifies six critical items that physiotherapists should consider when determining a paediatric patient's readiness for discharge from CPT after upper-abdominal, cardiac, or thoracic surgery: oxygen saturation, mobility, secretion retention, discharge planning, auscultation, and signs of respiratory distress. METHODS: A total of 33 paediatric patients (ages 2 to <19 years) who received at least 1 day of CPT following cardiac, thoracic, or upper-abdominal surgery were independently assessed using the Paediatric CPT Discharge Tool by two designated assessors, who assessed each patient within 4 hours of each other. RESULTS: Kappa analysis showed the following levels of interrater agreement for the six items of the Paediatric CPT Discharge Tool: Oxygen Saturation, excellent (κ=0.80); Mobility, substantial (κ=0.62); Secretion Clearance, moderate (κ=0.39); Discharge Planning, fair (κ=0.37); and Auscultation and Respiratory Distress, poor (κ=0.24 and κ=-0.08, respectively). CONCLUSION: Several of the items in the Paediatric CPT Discharge Tool demonstrate good IRR. The discharge tool is ready for further psychometric testing, specifically validity testing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.064
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.159
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0640.159
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiotherapy CanadaSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207