ArticleBMJ open2013
A reliability study of colour-Doppler sonography for the diagnosis of chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency shows low inter-rater agreement.
Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Original Research: Feasibility and safety of two surgical techniques for the development of an animal model of jugular vein occlusion.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2017Article
- Centralized and Local Color Doppler Ultrasound Reading Agreement for Diagnosis of the Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.Current neurovascular research · 2017Article
- Chronic Cerebrospinal Venous Insufficiency: A Failed Concept.Vascular specialist international · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI) has been extremely variable, associated with multiple sclerosis in colour-Doppler sonographic studies. We aimed to evaluate inter-rater agreement in a colour-Doppler sonography venous examination.
designInter-rater agreement study.
settingFirst-referral multiple sclerosis centre.
participants38 patients with multiple sclerosis and 55 age-matched (±5 years) controls.
interventionSonography was carried out in accordance with Zamboni's five criteria by eight sonographers with different expertise, blinded to the status of cases and controls. Each participant was evaluated by two operators. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Inter-rater agreement was measured through the κ statistics and the intraclass correlation coefficient.
resultsThe agreement was no higher than chance for criterion 2-reflux in the deep cerebral veins (κ=-0.02) and criterion 4-flow not Doppler detectable in one or both the internal jugular veins (IJVs) or vertebral veins (VVs; -0.09). It was substantially low for criterion 1-reflux in the IJVs and/or VVs (0.29), criterion 3-IJV stenosis or malformations (0.23) and criterion 5-absence of IJV diameter increase when passing from the sitting to the supine position (0.22). The κ value for CCSVI as a whole was 0.20 (95% confidence limit -0.01 to 0.42). Intraclass correlation coefficients for the measure of cross-sectional area ranged from 0.05 to 0.25. Inter-rater agreement was low for CCSVI experts (κ=0.24; -0.11 to 0.59) and non-experts (0.20; -0.33 to 0.73); neurologists (0.21; -0.06 to 0.47) and non-neurologists (0.18; -0.20 to 0.56); cases (0.19; -0.14 to 0.52) and controls (0.21; -0.08 to 0.49). Zamboni-trained neurosonographers ascertained CCSVI more frequently than the non-trained neurosonographers.
conclusionsAgreement was unsatisfactory for the diagnosis of CCSVI as a whole, for each of its five criteria and according to the different subgroups. Standardisation of the method is urgently needed prior to its further application in studies of patients with multiple sclerosis or other neurological diseases.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.