Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37685057›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

Reliability Associated with the Measurement of Continuous Variables in Veterinary Medicine: What the Different Possible Indicators Tell, and How to Use and Report Them.

Sébastien Buczinski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Sébastien BuczinskiDépartement des Sciences Cliniques, Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, St-Hyacinthe, QC J2S 2M2, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reliable indicators of health status (heart rate, rectal temperature, blood marker, etc.) are of cornerstone importance in the daily practice of veterinary medicine. The reliability of a measurement assesses the variability that is associated with the variable to be measured itself vs. other sources of variation (measurement device, person performing the measurement, etc.). Quantitative and continuous indicators are numerous in practice and the determination of their reliability is a complex issue. In the absence of a gold standard approach, several indicators of reliability have been described and can be used depending on several assumptions, study design, and type of measurement. The aim of this manuscript is, therefore, to determine the applicability of commonly described reliability indicators. After a description of the different sources of errors of a measurement, a review of the different indicators that are commonly used in the veterinary field as well as their applicability, limitations, and interpretations is performed.

Indexed as

Deming regressionintra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)Lin’s concordance correlation coefficientPassing–Bablok regression

Identifiers

PMID37685057
PMCPMC10486732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.