MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124185062 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000003956

Inter-rater Reliability of the Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Score in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy

2021· article· en· W3124185062 on OpenAlexaff
Allan R. Martin, Thorsten Jentzsch, Jamie Wilson, Ali Moghaddamjou, Fan Jiang, Anna Rienmueller, Jetan H. Badhiwala, Muhammad Ali Akbar, Anick Nater, Colby Oitment, Mario Ganau, Eric M. Massicotte, Michael G. Fehlings

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrthopedic surgeryMyelopathyInter-rater reliabilityReliability (semiconductor)Cervical spinePhysical therapyCervical vertebraeSurgerySpinal cordPsychiatryRating scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional blinded-assessor cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the inter-rater reliability of the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score in a large cohort of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The mJOA score is widely accepted as the primary outcome measure in DCM; it has been utilized in clinical practice guidelines and directly influences treatment recommendations, but its reliability has not been established. METHODS: A refined version of the mJOA was administered to DCM patients by two or more blinded clinicians. Inter-rater reliability was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), agreement, and mean difference for mJOA total score and subscores. Data were also analyzed with analysis of variance for differences by mJOA severity (mild: 15-17, moderate: 12-14, severe: <12), assessor, assessment order, previous surgery, age, and sex. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four DCM patients underwent 322 mJOA assessments (183 paired assessments). ICC was 0.88 for total mJOA, 0.79 for upper extremity (UE) motor, 0.84 for lower extremity (LE) motor, 0.63 for UE sensation, and 0.78 for urinary function subscores. Paired assessments were identical across all four subscores in 25%. The mean difference in mJOA was 0.93 points between assessors, and this differed by severity (mild: 0.68, moderate: 1.24, severe: 0.87, P = 0.001). Differences of ≥ 2 points occurred in 19%. Disagreement between mild and moderate severity occurred in 12% of patients. Other variables did not demonstrate significant relationships with mJOA scores. CONCLUSION: The inter-rater reliability of total mJOA and its subscores is good, except for UE sensory function (moderate). However, the vast majority of assessments differed between observers, indicating that this measure should be interpreted carefully, particularly when near the threshold between severity categories, or when a patient is reassessed for deterioration. Further efforts to educate clinicians on administration and to refine the UE sensory subscore may enhance the reliability of this tool.Level of Evidence: 1.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations45
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207