Interobserver Reliability of Urine Sediment Interpretation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Urine sediment interpretation is frequently used in the evaluation of patients with kidney disease. There has been no systematic evaluation of the reliability of this diagnostic maneuver. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Digital photographs of urine sediment images were acquired from 165 consecutive patients being evaluated by the nephrology consultation service at a tertiary care hospital. Urine sediment images of 100 patients were randomly selected; 86 patients had images that were deemed to be of sufficient quality, and one image per patient was chosen for inclusion in an internet-based questionnaire. For each image, the presence or absence of 14 potential urinary structures was ascertained. Ten nephrologists (senior readers [n = 3]: >10 yr of experience; intermediate readers [n = 3]: 1 to 10 yr of experience; and junior readers [n = 4]: first year of practice) completed the questionnaire. For each urinary structure, we measured the rate of complete agreement among the readers as well as the kappa statistic as a marker of agreement beyond chance. RESULTS: Unanimous agreement was highest (79.1%) regarding the presence of broad and fatty casts and poorest (31.4%) for the identification of dysmorphic red blood cells and white blood cells. Interobserver agreement was best for squamous epithelial cells (kappa = 0.54) and hyaline casts (kappa = 0.52) and worst for transitional epithelial cells (kappa = 0.14) and fatty casts (kappa = 0.06). When assessed within strata of physician experience, interobserver agreement was not associated with seniority. CONCLUSIONS: Nephrologists achieved slight to moderate agreement in the identification of structures that are commonly observed in the urine sediment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".