ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2023
Agreement Between Single Raters and Team Rating When Applying the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health's Rehabilitation Set.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Consistency evaluation of nursing interns and nurses using the ICF-RS for rehabilitation assessment.BMC nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo quantify the agreement between functional assessments by a single rater and a team using the Chinese version of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Rehabilitation Set in a clinical situation.
designInter-rater, multi-centre agreement study. SUBJECTS: A total of 193 adult inpatients admitted to 5 rehabilitation centres at 5 hospitals in China Methods: The Chinese version of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Rehabilitation Set was used by either a single rater or a team to assess 193 patients at 5 Chinese hospitals. Percentage of agreement and quadratic-weighted kappa coefficients were computed. Evaluation times were compared with paired t-tests.
resultsThe mean team and individual evaluation times were not significantly different. The percentage of agreement ranged from 46.1% to 94.2% depending on the item, and the quadratic-weighted kappas ranged from 0.43 to 0.92. Eight categories (26.6%) showed a weighted kappa exceeding 0.4, 11 others (36.7%) exceeded 0.6, and another 11 (36.7%) produced kappas of more than 0.8.
conclusionEither a single rater or a team of raters can produce valid and consistent ratings when using the Chinese version of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Rehabilitation Set to assess patients in a rehabilitation department. The team rating approach is suitable for clinical application.
Indexed as
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.