ArticleScientific reports2019
Interrater and intrarater agreement and reliability of ratings made using the Zaidi-Dayal and Richards-Jabbour scales for the shape of the foramen magnum.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anatomists and radiologists use the Zaidi-Dayal and Richards-Jabbour scales to study the shape of the foramen magnum. Our aim is to measure the interrater and intrarater agreement and reliability of ratings made using the two scales. We invited 16 radiology residents to attend two sessions, four weeks apart. During each session, we asked the residents to classify the shape of the foramen magnum in 35 images using both scales. We used Fleiss' κ to measure interrater reliability and Cohen's κ to measure intrarater reliability. The interrater reliability of ratings made using the Zaidi-Dayal scale was 0.34 (0.26-0.46) for session one and 0.30 (0.24-0.39) for session two, and the intrarater reliability was 0.39 (0.34-0.44). The interrater reliability of ratings made using the Richards-Jabbour scale was 0.14 (0.10-0.19) for session one and 0.12 (0.09-0.17) for session two, and the intrarater reliability was 0.11 (0.07-0.15). In conclusion, the interrater and intrarater agreement and reliability of ratings made using the Zaidi-Dayal and Richards-Jabbour scales are inadequate. We recommend an objective method by Zdilla et al. to researchers interested in studying the shape of the foramen magnum.
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.