ArticleNephro-urology monthly2016
Increasing the Reliability of the Grading System for Voiding Cystourethrograms Using Ultrasonography: An Inter-Rater Comparison.
Article in Nephro-urology monthly, 2016. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting vesicoureteral reflux outcomes using artificial intelligence: A critical appraisal using APPRAISE-AI.PLOS digital health · 2026Review
- Management of Vesicoureteral Reflux: What Have We Learned Over the Last 20 Years?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the effectiveness of the current vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) grading system according to the international classification of VUR (ICVUR) and to evaluate whether VUR grading accuracy could be improved by renal ultrasonography (RU) according to the Society for Fetal Urology (SFU) grading system.
objectivesTherefore, this study assessed the accuracy of the current VCUG staging system by assessing inter-rater reliability among pediatric radiologists and urologists; it also evaluated whether accuracy is increased by RU without consensus (with respect to VCUG grading).
methodsFour pediatric urologists and four pediatric radiologists independently graded 120 voiding cystourethrograms (VCUGs). Middle VUR grades were divided into the following three groups: VUR consensus grade III (group 1), VUR consensus grade IV (group 3), and VUR non-consensus grades III and IV (group 2). All groups were compared with respect to hydronephrosis grade using RU.
resultsThe intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 reflected good reliability. The lowest agreement was associated with middle grades (III and IV). A marked difference in sensitivity was observed between groups 1 and 3 (35% and 95%, respectively, P < 0.05), indexed by SFU hydronephrosis grade, suggesting that VCUG cases in group 2 (n = 16 at SFU 0 or 1) could be accepted as grade III, and SFU scores of 2, 3, or 4 could be considered grade IV.
conclusionsInter-rater accuracy could be improved at middle grades using renal ultrasonography (USG), which could promote communication between different specialists.
Indexed as
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.