Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30062738›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2018

Overall indices for assessing agreement among multiple raters.

Jeong Hoon Jang, Amita K Manatunga, Andrew T Taylor, Qi Long

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Unscaled Indices for Assessing Agreement of Functional Data.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jeong Hoon JangDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.ORCID 0000-0003-0811-2296
Amita K ManatungaDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.ORCID 0000-0002-2289-563X
Andrew T TaylorDepartment of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Qi LongDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID 0000-0003-0660-5230

Funding

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA CAN CTR SUPPORT GRANTP30CA016520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Robert H. Vonderheide · 1985 to 2026
$222.3M
Development and Assessment of Decision Supporting System for Renal studiesR01DK108070 · NIDDK · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI MANATUNGA, AMITA K. · 2016 to 2020
$1.7M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016520NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK108070
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The need to assess agreement exists in various clinical studies where quantifying inter-rater reliability is of great importance. Use of unscaled agreement indices, such as total deviation index and coverage probability (CP), is recommended for two main reasons: (i) they are intuitive in a sense that interpretations are tied to the original measurement unit; (ii) practitioners can readily determine whether the agreement is satisfactory by directly comparing the value of the index to a prespecified tolerable CP or absolute difference. However, the unscaled indices were only defined in the context of comparing two raters or multiple raters that assume homogeneity of variances across raters. In this paper, we introduce a set of overall indices based on the root mean square of pairwise differences that are unscaled and can be used to evaluate agreement among multiple raters that often exhibit heterogeneous measurement processes in practice. Furthermore, we propose another overall agreement index based on the root mean square of pairwise differences that is scaled and extends the concept of the recently proposed relative area under CP curve in the presence of multiple raters. We present the definitions of overall indices and propose inference procedures in which bootstrap methods are used for the estimation of standard errors. We assess the performance of the proposed approach and demonstrate its superiority over the existing methods when raters exhibit heterogeneous measurement processes using simulation studies. Finally, we demonstrate the application of our methods using a renal study.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalObserver VariationBiasChi-Square DistributionHumansModels, Statisticalagreementcoverage probabilitymultiple ratersroot-mean-square differenceunscaled index

Identifiers

PMID30062738
PMCPMC6587587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.