Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33284465›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2021

Interobserver and intraobserver reliability for 2 grading systems for gastric ulcer syndrome in horses.

Jessica C Wise, Edwina J A Wilkes, Sharanne L Raidal, Gang Xie, Danielle E Crosby, Josephine N Hale, Kristopher J Hughes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Equine Gastric Ulcer Syndrome: An Update on Current Knowledge.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jessica C WiseSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3483-9384
Edwina J A WilkesSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8410-5894
Sharanne L RaidalSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5558-3133
Gang XieQuantitative Consultant Unit, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.
Danielle E CrosbySchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.
Josephine N HaleSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.
Kristopher J HughesSchool of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8405-6268
Charles Sturt University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGrading of equine gastric ulcer syndrome (EGUS) is undertaken in clinical and research settings, but the reliability of EGUS grading systems is poorly understood. HYPOTHESIS/

objectivesInvestigate interobserver and intraobserver reliability of an established ordinal grading system and a novel visual analog scale (VAS), and assess the influence of observer experience. ANIMALS: Sixty deidentified gastroscopy videos.

methodsSix observers (3 specialists and 3 residents) graded videos using the EGUS Council (EGUC) system and VAS. Observers graded the videos three 3 for each system, using a cross-over design with at least 1 week between each phase. The order of videos was randomized for each phase.

methodsInterobserver and intraobserver reliability were estimated using Gwet's agreement coefficient with ordinal weights applied (AC2) for the EGUC system and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the VAS.

resultsUsing the EGUC system, interobserver reliability was substantial for squamous (AC2 = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.80) and glandular mucosa (AC2 = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.70-0.75), and intraobserver reliability was substantial for squamous (AC2 = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90) and glandular mucosa (AC2 = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.86). Interobserver reliability using the VAS was moderate for squamous (ICC = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.31-0.96) and poor for glandular mucosa (ICC = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.06-0.64), and intraobserver reliability was moderate for squamous (ICC = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.86) and glandular mucosa (ICC = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.72). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The EGUC system had acceptable intraobserver and interobserver reliability and performed well regardless of observer experience. Familiarity and observer experience improved reliability of the VAS.

Indexed as

Horse DiseasesStomach UlcerAnimalsGastroscopyHorsesHumansObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsEGUSgrading systemshorsereliabilityVAS

Identifiers

PMID33284465
PMCPMC7848314
OpenAlexW3111765396

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.