MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213219915 · doi:10.1002/pri.1944

Assessing the inter‐rater and intra‐rater reliability of the Physical Therapy Competence Assessment for Airway Suctioning (PT‐CAAS)

2022· article· en· W4213219915 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Miller, Dina Brooks, Kelly K. O’Brien, Lindsay Beavers, Paul W. Stratford, Mika Nonoyama, Brenda Mori

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy Research International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNosocomial Infections in ICU
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesOntario Tech UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenInstitute for Work & HealthWest Park Healthcare CentreMcMaster UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSickKids FoundationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationInter-rater reliabilityMedicineCompetence (human resources)Confidence intervalPhysical therapyStandard errorIntra-rater reliabilityReliability (semiconductor)PsychologyPsychometricsInternal medicineStatisticsClinical psychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Physical Therapy Competence Assessment for Airway Suctioning (PT-CAAS) is a recently developed measure to assess the clinical competence of physiotherapists who perform airway suctioning with adults. The purpose of this study was to assess the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of the PT-CAAS. METHODS: Scoring rules were developed through expert consultation. Reliability was then assessed using nine videos of suctioning performed in a simulated learning environment. A repeated measures design was used, with two replicate sets of measurements made by each participant for all videos. Data were analyzed using a repeated measures model for the concurrent assessment of inter-rater and intra-rater reliability. Participants were physiotherapists with suctioning experience. RESULTS: Twenty physiotherapists completed initial scoring and re-scoring for all nine videos; their data were included in the analysis. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.569 [lower one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.395; standard error of measurement (SEM): 0.963] for infection control to 0.759 (lower one-sided 95% CI: 0.612; SEM: 0.722) for post-suctioning assessment and care. The inter-rater ICC for overall performance was 0.752 (lower one-sided 95% CI: 0.602; SEM: 0.660). ICCs for intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.759 (lower one-sided 95% CI: 0.197; SEM 0.721) for infection control to 0.860 (lower one-sided 95% CI: 0.544; SEM: 0.550) for post-suctioning assessment and care. The intra-rater ICC for overall performance was 0.867 (lower one-sided 95% CI: 0.559; SEM: 0.483). DISCUSSION: Evidence of moderate to good inter-rater and good intra-rater reliability was found; however, the results should be interpreted with caution given the wide CIs and relatively large SEMs. Improved assessor training and assessments of reliability using a larger sample size are recommended.

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)0.108
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.129
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 score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1080.129
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.423 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiotherapy Research InternationalSame topicNosocomial Infections in ICUFrench-language works237,207