Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36049073›Full record

ArticleVeterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association2023

Intra- and interobserver assessments of intestinal wall thickness and segmentations from transverse sections of feline abdominal ultrasound images.

Jasmine Chang, Ian R Porter, Marnin A Forman, Natalya Shcherban, Parminder S Basran

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Intra- and interobserver assessments of intestinal wall thickness and segmentations from transverse sections of feline abdominal ultrasound images.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2023
    Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jasmine ChangDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Ian R PorterDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Marnin A FormanCornell University Veterinary Specialists, Stamford, Connecticut, USA.
Natalya ShcherbanDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Parminder S BasranDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1573-1549
Cornell University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measurements of intestinal wall thicknesses from ultrasound imaging (US) are routinely used to support diagnoses of intestinal disorders in cats, however published studies describing observer agreement are currently lacking. The aim of this retrospective, observer agreement study was to quantify inter- and intraobserver repeatability and agreement in the measurement of intestinal wall layer thicknesses and the segmentation of transverse sections of small intestines in US images of 20 cats. Intestinal wall layer thickness measurements of the mucosa, submucosa, muscularis, serosa layer, and total thickness of these layers were performed on five cats with small cell epitheliotropic lymphoma, five with inflammatory bowel disease, and 10 with other conditions. Thickness measurements and the segmentation encompassing the serosa layer were obtained from five observers four times non-sequentially. The average standard deviation in thickness measurements (95% confidence interval) in the mucosa, submucosa, muscularis, serosa, and total thickness were 0.35 (0.07-0.95), 0.24 (0.07-0.52), 0.22 (0.06-0.49), 0.20 (0.05-0.49), and 0.57 (0.11-1.60) mm, respectively. The average intraclass correlation coefficients, which estimates the degree of consistency in thickness measurements and segmentation areas for each observer, ranged from 0.355 to 0.870 and 0.850 to 0.993, respectively. The interclass correlation coefficient, which estimates the degree of consistency when measuring a thickness or segmentation area over all observers ranged from 0.115 to 0.753, and 0.811 to 0.902, respectively. The overall average Dice Coefficient, which estimates the extent of overlap of the segmentations for all observers was 0.957 (0.933 to 0.972). Our results suggest segmentations of small intestines have a higher interobserver agreement than measurements of intestinal wall thicknesses.

Indexed as

IntestinesIntestine, SmallAnimalsCatsObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesUltrasonographycatintestinelayermeasurementrepeatability

Identifiers

PMID36049073
PMCPMC10087235
OpenAlexW4294190818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.