Reliability of the Sunnybrook Facial Grading System by Novice Users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the intrarater and inter-rater reliability of the Sunnybrook Facial Grading System (SFGS) by novice users. DESIGN: Prospective interval study using one measurement instrument. SETTING: Tertiary teaching hospital (Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Science Centre). METHODS: Twenty-two patients with a wide spectrum of facial dysfunction recorded on videotapes were rated using the SFGS by eight novice observers independently in two different sittings separated by 3 weeks. The order of patients was randomized for the second sitting. Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated for component scores and for total scores within and between raters. RESULTS: The intrarater reliability coefficients for the eight raters ranged from .838 to .929. This largely overlaps with the data obtained in previous studies with expert raters. The inter-rater reliability for all eight raters at time 1 was .982 and for time 2 was .970. This is higher than what was previously obtained with expert raters. CONCLUSION: The SFGS is as reliable when applied by novice users as by expert users.
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 | 0.011 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".