Inter-rater Reliability of the Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Score in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.015 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".