Interdisciplinary Consensus in Evaluating the Severity Subscale of the Original and Revised Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale Through Video‐Based Assessment: An Inter‐Rater Reliability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) is widely employed for cervical dystonia (CD) evaluation. OBJECTIVE: To assess the inter-rater reliability of the severity subscale of the original and revised TWSTRS using video recordings. METHODS: Three raters, a PhD student with a nursing degree, a physiotherapist specialized in CD, and a neurologist-in-training independently rated all videos. The inter-rater reliability was assessed with the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The total severity score of both tools demonstrated a good inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.87 to 0.88). The inter-rater reliability of individual sub-items varied from poor (ICC = 0.29) to excellent (ICC = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: The total severity score of both TWSTRS showed good inter-rater reliability in a multidisciplinary team, indicating their applicability for online patients' assessment. We recommend using the total subscale for outcome comparison. Furthermore, there is a need for more accurate definitions of duration factor and shoulder elevation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".