MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385268093 · doi:10.1044/2023_ajslp-22-00177

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis–Bulbar Dysfunction Index–Remote: Test–Retest and Interrater Reliability of Candidate Items

2023· article· en· W4385268093 on OpenAlexaff
Liziane Bouvier, Jordan R. Green, Carolina Barnett Tapia, Victoria Tilton-Bolowsky, Marc F. Maffei, Zuzana Fless, Katie Seaver, Anna Huynh, Sarah E. Gutz, Rosemary Martino, Agessandro Abrahão, James D. Berry, Lorne Zinman, Yana Yunusova

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDysphagia Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentrePublic Health OntarioSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
KeywordsInter-rater reliabilityAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisAudiologyKappaPsychologyReliability (semiconductor)Cohen's kappaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineDiseaseComputer scienceDevelopmental psychologyPathologyRating scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The primary aim of this study was to establish the reliability of candidate items as a step in the development of the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Bulbar Dysfunction Index-Remote (ALS-BDI-Remote), a novel tool being developed for the detection and monitoring of bulbar signs and symptoms in remote settings. METHOD: The set of candidate items included 40 items covering three domains: cranial nerve examination, auditory-perceptual evaluation, and functional assessment. Forty-eight participants diagnosed with ALS and exhibiting a range of bulbar disease severity were included. Data collection for each participant took place on Zoom over three sessions. During Session 1, the participants were instructed to adjust their Zoom settings and to optimize their recording environment (e.g., lighting, background noise). Their cognition and eating were screened to determine their ability to follow instructions and their eligibility to perform the swallowing and chewing tasks. During Session 2, two speech-language pathologists (SLPs) administered the tool consecutively to determine the items' interrater reliability. During Session 3, one of the SLPs readministered the tool within 2 weeks of Session 1 to assess test-retest reliability. The reliability of each item was estimated using weighted kappa and the percentage of agreement. To be considered reliable, the items had to reach a threshold of 0.5 weighted kappa or 80% percentage agreement (if skewed distribution of the scores) for both interrater and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: In total, 33 of the 40 candidate items reached the reliability cutoff for both reliability analyses. All assessment domains included reliable items. Items requiring very good visualization of structures or movements were generally less reliable. CONCLUSIONS: This study resulted in the selection of reliable items to be included in the next version of the ALS-BDI-Remote, which will undergo psychometric evaluation (reliability, validity, and responsiveness analyses). Additionally, the results contributed to our understanding of the remote administration of SLP assessments for telehealth applications.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Speech-Language PathologySame topicDysphagia Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207