ArticleKidney research and clinical practice2026
Interobserver agreement analysis among renal pathologists in classification of lupus nephritis using a digital pathology image dataset: after a third evaluation.
Article in Kidney research and clinical practice, 2026. 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.
- Reappraising Kidney Biopsy in Diabetic Kidney Disease: Histopathology, Clinical Course, and the Future of Precision Nephrology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Interobserver reproducibility in histopathological findings of lupus nephritis: how can we improve it?Kidney research and clinical practice · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundLupus nephritis is well-known for low concordance in classification. Furthermore, there has been no agreement analysis among Korean renal pathologists regarding lupus nephritis. Inconsistent diagnosis leads to confusion and increases medical costs, as well as failure of appropriate therapeutic interventions. This study aimed to assess the level of agreement among Korean renal pathologists regarding classification.
methodsRepresentative glomerular images from patients diagnosed with lupus nephritis were obtained from five hospitals. Twenty-five questions were formulated, and multiple-choice questions with 14 options, consisting of characteristic histopathological findings of lupus nephritis were provided. Three rounds of surveys were conducted and educational sessions were conducted before the second and third surveys.
resultsThe agreement was calculated using Fleiss' κ and the means for each round of questions were as follows: Survey 1, 0.42 (range, 0.18-0.61), Survey 2, 0.42 (range, 0.19-0.64), and Survey 3, 0.47 (range, 0.23-0.65). Although κ after the first education session showed no significant difference compared to the initial κ (p = 0.95), after the second education session, κ increased significantly compared to the initial κ (p < 0.001). The κ for each item generally increased with each education session, but they were not statistically significant (p = 0.46, p = 0.17). Additionally, the rankings of agreement, for each item, were relatively consistent.
conclusionThis study conducted an interobserver agreement analysis of Korean pathologists for lupus nephritis, with the goal of increasing agreement through education. Although the education increased overall agreement, items like "mesangial hypercellularity," "endocapillary hypercellularity," and "neutrophils and/or karyorrhexis" remained inconsistent attributable to innate subjectivity and ineffective education.
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.