Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30465615›Full record

ArticleJournal of feline medicine and surgery2019

Inter-rater and inter-device reliability of mechanical thresholds measurement with the Electronic von Frey Anaesthesiometer and the SMALGO in healthy cats.

Chiara Adami, Elena Lardone, Paolo Monticelli

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Pressure pain mapping of equine distal joints: feasibility and reliability.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chiara AdamiDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Services, Royal Veterinary College, University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1909-5807
Elena LardoneDepartment of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Paolo MonticelliDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Services, Royal Veterinary College, University of London, London, UK.
University of London · GBUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the Electronic von Frey Anaesthesiometer (EVF) and the Small Animal ALGOmeter (SMALGO), used to measure sensory thresholds in 13 healthy cats at both the stifle and the lumbosacral joint, in terms of inter-rater and inter-device reliability.

methodsTwo independent observers carried out the sets of measurements in a randomised order, with a 45 min interval between them, in each cat. The inter-rater and inter-device reliability were evaluated by calculating the inter-rater correlation coefficient (ICC) for each pair of measurements. The Bland-Altman method was used as an additional tool to assess the level of agreement between the two algometers.

resultsThe mean ± SD sensory thresholds measured with the EVF were 311 ± 116 g and 378 ± 178 g for the stifle and for the lumbosacral junction, respectively, whereas those measured with the SMALGO were 391 ±172 g and 476 ± 172 g. The inter-rater reliability was fair (ICC >0.4) for each pair of measurements except those taken at the level of the stifle with the SMALGO, for which the level of agreement between observers A and B was poor (ICC = 0.01). The inter-device reliability was good (ICC = 0.73; CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The EVF and the SMALGO may be used interchangeably in cats, especially when the area to be tested is the lumbosacral joint. However, when the thresholds are measured at the stifle, the inter-observer reliability is better with the EVF than with the SMALGO. The reliability decreases when the measurements are repeated within a short time interval, suggesting a limited clinical applicability of quantitative sensory testing with both algometers in cats.

Indexed as

Sensory ThresholdsAnimalsCat DiseasesCatsFemaleMaleNeurologic ExaminationObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsChronic painmechanical thresholdsquantitative sensory testing

Identifiers

PMID30465615
PMCPMC11132251
OpenAlexW2901373330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.