MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111455071 · doi:10.1177/2325967113s00074

Reliability of the ROCK Osteochondritis Dissecans Knee Arthroscopy Classification System - Multi-center Validation Study

2013· article· en· W2111455071 on OpenAlexaff
James L. Carey, Eric J. Wall, Kevin G. Shea, Nathan L. Grimm, Allen F. Anderson, Eric W. Edmonds, Henry G. Chambers, Benton E. Heyworth, Mininder S. Kocher, Roger Lyon, M. Lucas Murnaghan, Carl W. Nissen, John D. Polousky, Jennifer M. Weiss, Rick W. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteochondritis dissecansArthroscopyOrthopedic surgeryReliability (semiconductor)Inter-rater reliabilityPhysical therapyMedical physicsSurgeryRating scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Very few predictors of healing have been identified to help guide OCD treatment decisions for patients, families and physicians. As this condition is not common, multi-center study groups will be necessary to determine optimal diagnostic and treatment strategies. For staging systems to be useful, there must be agreement among observers of each stage, and from different centers. Although arthroscopic staging systems exist for OCD, none have been tested for intra-observer and inter-observer reliability. Using an expert consensus method, the ROCK OCD study group developed an arthroscopy classification system for OCD of the knee. The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of an OCD classification system in a multicenter study group. Methods: We developed a classification system for arthroscopic evaluation of OCD of the knee based on the experience of a 13 centers experienced in the care of OCD. The classification system produced 6 arthroscopic categories (Cue Ball, Shadow, Wrinkle in the Rug, Locked Door, Trap Door, and Crater). A training module including arthroscopic photos, iconic sketches, and representative videos was developed to describe each stage. A total of 30 representative arthroscopic videos were viewed by 10 orthopedic surgeons who had not participated in the video case selection and preparation. After 60 days, the 30 videos were reviewed a second time in a new, randomly selected order and classified. An inter-rater reliability assessment was performed using the intra-class correlation method. Results: The intra-class correlation coefficient was 0.92, indicating a very good to excellent reliability of this classification system amongst orthopedic surgeons within the ROCK group. Conclusion: The ROCK OCD Knee arthroscopy classification system demonstrated high reliability. Relatively rare conditions will require multi-center study groups to perform high quality outcome studies. This classification system will facilitate multi-center studies for OCD.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207