A population based study on the intra and inter‐rater reliability of the clock drawing test in Brazil: the Bambuí Health and Ageing Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reliability should be considered when selecting a scoring system since it influences validity. CDT reliability has rarely been assessed in population based studies and in developing countries. The aim of the present study was to determine intra and inter-rater reliabilities of the CDT scored by the Shulman (2000) method, in elderly with very low formal educational level from Brazil. METHODS: CDTs performed by a random sample of 202 subjects of a population-based cohort of elderly were scored on two occasions by the same rater and by two independent raters. Reliability was measured using the kappa statistic, weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Data were stratified according to gender, age and schooling level. RESULTS: Intra and inter-rater reliabilities were excellent when CDTs were classified as 'normal' (scores 4 or 5) or 'abnormal' (scores 0 to 3) (kappa = 0.99 and 0.94, respectively) and were in the good to excellent range when scored from 0 to 5 (kappa = 0.88 and 0.74, respectively). Difficulties in distinguishing between scores 4 and 5, and a low proportion of score 1 tests were found. CONCLUSIONS: The CDT scored by the Shulman (2000) method appears to have good to excellent reliability in an elderly population with very low formal educational level. However, difficulties in distinguishing between scores 4 and 5, and a low proportion of score 1 tests suggest these scores may not be totally adequate for this population. Further studies are necessary to determine the consistency of our results in similar populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".