interpretation

解释
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:一种健康(OH)被定义为一种统一的方法,旨在可持续地平衡和优化人们的健康,动物和生态系统。它认识到人类的健康,动物(家养和野生动物),植物和更广泛的生态系统既相互依存又联系在一起。作为一个概念,它旨在解决需要多个学科输入的复杂问题。OH方法的合适问题通常包括全球性问题,这些问题不仅可以广泛影响人类和动物的健康,但也有重大的环境影响。例子包括新出现的人畜共患疾病和抗菌素耐药性(AMR)。术语OH的解释和使用在文献中不同,并且有可能稀释其影响。OH在研究界中的意义随着时间的推移而演变。这里,我们整理了过去二十年来OH的相关文献,确定主要主题和趋势,并考虑OH在各个地理区域的不同接受方式。
    结果:在1980年至2022年期间,使用术语“一种健康”和(“兽医”或“动物”)和(“医学”或“人类”)和(“环境”或“生态系统”)搜索了书目数据库。数据分析和叙事综合确定的主题,相似性,以及文学内部的差异。WebofScience和PubMed在上述期间返回了948和1250个结果。主要文献集中在人类健康上,兽医健康第二,虽然往往有益于人类健康。发现OH通常被用作公共卫生方法,通常在疾病监测和控制结束时。有趣的是,虽然来自低收入和中等收入国家的作者在使用OH术语的研究中得到了很好的代表,他们作为通讯作者的代表性较低。
    结论:文献的主要焦点是人类和兽医健康,暗示OH的方法是以人为本的,尽管它建议所有域共享一个共同的“健康”。通过更多地纳入环境和社会科学以采取更全面的方法,可以实现对OH的潜在改进。
    BACKGROUND: One Health (OH) is defined as a unifying approach aiming to sustainably balance and optimise the health of people, animals and the ecosystem. It recognises that the health of humans, animals (both domestic and wild), plants and the wider ecosystem are both interdependent and linked. As a concept, it aims to address complex problems requiring input from multiple disciplines. Suitable issues for OH approaches typically include global issues which can widely impact not only the health of humans and animals, but also have a significant environmental impact. Examples include emerging zoonotic diseases and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Interpretations and use of the term OH differ in the literature and have the potential to dilute its impact. The meaning of OH among the research community has evolved over time. Here, we collate the OH relevant literature from the last two decades, identifying major themes and trends and considering how OH has been embraced differently across various geographical regions.
    RESULTS: Bibliographic databases were searched using the term \"One Health\" AND (\"Veterinary\" OR \"Animal\") AND (\"Medicine\" OR \"Human\") AND (\"Environment\" OR \"Ecosystem\") during the period between 1980 and 2022. Data analysis and narrative synthesis identified themes, similarities, and differences within literature. Web of Science and PubMed returned 948 and 1250 results for the period mentioned above. The predominant literature focused on human health, with veterinary health second, although often to benefit human health. It was found that OH is often utilised as a public health approach, generally towards the end of disease surveillance and control. Interestingly, while authors from low- and middle-income countries were well-represented within studies using the term OH, they were less well-represented as corresponding authors.
    CONCLUSIONS: The predominant focus of the literature was on human and veterinary health, implying OH approach is human-orientated, despite its suggestion that all domains share a common \'health\'. Potential improvement to OH could be achieved through greater incorporation of the environmental and social sciences for a more encompassing approach.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    大多数肿瘤学试验根据频率显著性阈值定义了实验治疗与对照治疗相比的优越性。被广泛误解。通过贝叶斯推断计算的后验概率分布可能是更直观的不确定性度量,特别是对于临床益处的测量,例如最小临床重要差异(MCID)。这里,我们手动重建了230个III期的194,129个患者水平的结果,优越性设计,肿瘤学试验。后验是通过使用标准先验的马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗抽样计算的。所有被解释为阳性的试验的边际效益概率>90%(HR<1)。然而,38%的阳性试验达到MCID的概率≤90%(HR<0.8),即使在热情的事先。对82项获得监管部门批准的试验进行的亚组分析显示,在热情的先验下,30%的人符合MCID的概率≤90%。相反,24%的阴性试验有>90%的概率实现边际效益,即使在怀疑之前,包括12项主要终点为总生存期的试验。最后,来自先前工作的III期肿瘤学特异性之前,它使用公布的汇总统计数据而不是重建的数据来计算后验,验证了个体患者水平的数据发现。一起来看,这些结果表明,贝叶斯模型为III期肿瘤学试验增加了相当独特的解释价值,并为克服驳斥零假设与获得MCID之间的差异提供了可靠的解决方案.
    结论:肿瘤学试验的统计分析通常通过计算P值来进行,虽然人们对这些知之甚少。使用P值截止值,如P<0.05,可能导致一些治疗被接受,没有什么好处,和其他疗法被拒绝,有相当大的好处。可以通过贝叶斯统计来计算更直观和直接的概率-实验性治疗优于标准治疗。在这里,我们使用软件获得了230项试验中纳入的194,129名患者的结果,然后计算受益概率。基于P值的解释与三分之一试验的获益概率不一致。这项研究表明,受益概率将大大提高肿瘤学试验的解释。
    Most oncology trials define superiority of an experimental therapy compared to a control therapy according to frequentist significance thresholds, which are widely misinterpreted. Posterior probability distributions computed by Bayesian inference may be more intuitive measures of uncertainty, particularly for measures of clinical benefit such as the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Here, we manually reconstructed 194,129 individual patient-level outcomes across 230 phase III, superiority-design, oncology trials. Posteriors were calculated by Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling using standard priors. All trials interpreted as positive had probabilities > 90% for marginal benefits (HR < 1). However, 38% of positive trials had ≤ 90% probabilities of achieving the MCID (HR < 0.8), even under an enthusiastic prior. A subgroup analysis of 82 trials that led to regulatory approval showed 30% had ≤ 90% probability for meeting the MCID under an enthusiastic prior. Conversely, 24% of negative trials had > 90% probability of achieving marginal benefits, even under a skeptical prior, including 12 trials with a primary endpoint of overall survival. Lastly, a phase III oncology-specific prior from a previous work, which uses published summary statistics rather than reconstructed data to compute posteriors, validated the individual patient-level data findings. Taken together, these results suggest that Bayesian models add considerable unique interpretative value to phase III oncology trials and provide a robust solution for overcoming the discrepancies between refuting the null hypothesis and obtaining a MCID.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:结果测量仪器(OMI)用于衡量治疗效果。在中风后失语症康复中,需要有意义变化的基准来支持对患者结果的解释。这项研究是一项研究计划的一部分,旨在为核心OMI建立最小重要变化(MIC)值(患者认为自己发生了重要变化的最小变化)。作为这个过程的第一步,探讨了失语症患者和临床医生的观点,并就临床意义改变的阈值达成共识.
    方法:采用顺序混合方法设计。参与者包括中风后失语症患者和言语病理学家。失语症患者根据中风后的时间进行有目的地采样,年龄和性别,而言语病理学家根据他们的工作环境(医院或社区)进行采样。每个参与者都参加了一个焦点小组,然后是一个带有调查内容的共识讲习班。在焦点小组中,探索了测量失语症恢复过程中有意义变化的经验和方法。定性数据采用反身性主题分析进行转录和分析。在共识研讨会上,参与者对语言核心结果结构有意义变化的阈值进行了投票,通信,情绪健康和生活质量,使用6点评分量表(更糟糕的是,稍差一点,没有变化,略有改善,大大改善并完全恢复)。共识被先验地定义为70%的协议。使用描述性统计报告投票结果。
    结果:5名失语症患者(n=4,卒中后>6个月;n=5,<65岁;n=3,男性)和8名言语病理学家(n=4,医院设置;n=4,社区设置)参加了四个焦点小组之一(持续时间:92-112分钟)。确定了四个主题,描述了有意义的变化如下:(1)每个人的不同;(2)小的持续改进;(3)通过个人相关目标的进展来衡量;(4)受个人因素的影响。“轻微改善”被认为是中风后6个月内锚定评定量表(75%-92%)的MIC阈值,而在6个月后,有一种趋势是支持“大大改善”(36%-66%)。
    结论:我们对失语症患者和言语病理学家的混合方法研究提供了新的证据来告知MIC在失语症康复中的定义。未来的研究将旨在为核心OMI建立MIC值。
    这项工作是有中风后失语症生活经验的人之间参与的结果,包括失语症患者,家庭成员,临床医生和研究人员。在整个研究周期中进行参与,以确保研究任务是参与者可以接受和容易理解的,并且研究结果与失语症社区相关。这种参与包括共同开发结果的简单英文摘要。根据昆士兰州健康消费者指南,顾问获得了报酬。临床医生的采访指南由从事失语症康复工作的言语病理学家试行。
    BACKGROUND: Outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) are used to gauge the effects of treatment. In post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation, benchmarks for meaningful change are needed to support the interpretation of patient outcomes. This study is part of a research programme to establish minimal important change (MIC) values (the smallest change above which patients perceive themselves as importantly changed) for core OMIs. As a first step in this process, the views of people with aphasia and clinicians were explored, and consensus was sought on a threshold for clinically meaningful change.
    METHODS: Sequential mixed-methods design was employed. Participants included people with post-stroke aphasia and speech pathologists. People with aphasia were purposively sampled based on time post-stroke, age and gender, whereas speech pathologists were sampled according to their work setting (hospital or community). Each participant attended a focus group followed by a consensus workshop with a survey component. Within the focus groups, experiences and methods for measuring meaningful change during aphasia recovery were explored. Qualitative data were transcribed and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. In the consensus workshop, participants voted on thresholds for meaningful change in core outcome constructs of language, communication, emotional well-being and quality of life, using a six-point rating scale (much worse, slightly worse, no change, slightly improved, much improved and completely recovered). Consensus was defined a priori as 70% agreement. Voting results were reported using descriptive statistics.
    RESULTS: Five people with aphasia (n = 4, > 6 months after stroke; n = 5, < 65 years; n = 3, males) and eight speech pathologists (n = 4, hospital setting; n = 4, community setting) participated in one of four focus groups (duration: 92-112 min). Four themes were identified describing meaningful change as follows: (1) different for every single person; (2) small continuous improvements; (3) measured by progress towards personally relevant goals; and (4) influenced by personal factors. \'Slightly improved\' was agreed as the threshold of MIC on the anchor-rating scale (75%-92%) within 6 months of stroke, whereas after 6 months there was a trend towards supporting \'much improved\' (36%-66%).
    CONCLUSIONS: Our mixed-methods research with people with aphasia and speech pathologists provides novel evidence to inform the definition of MIC in aphasia rehabilitation. Future research will aim to establish MIC values for core OMIs.
    UNASSIGNED: This work is the result of engagement between people with lived experience of post-stroke aphasia, including people with aphasia, family members, clinicians and researchers. Engagement across the research cycle was sought to ensure that the research tasks were acceptable and easily understood by participants and that the outcomes of the study were relevant to the aphasia community. This engagement included the co-development of a plain English summary of the results. Advisors were remunerated in accordance with Health Consumers Queensland guidelines. Interview guides for clinicians were piloted by speech pathologists working in aphasia rehabilitation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:肺功能检查对于诊断肺部疾病至关重要,评估治疗反应,监测呼吸健康。2022年欧洲呼吸和美国胸科协会(ERS/ATS)对解释性标准的最新更新与2005年标准相比发生了重大变化。它们包括合并肺容量测量,非特异性和混合性疾病,引入功能异常评估的z分数,将严重程度类别从5个减少到3个,并修订支气管扩张剂阳性反应的标准。
    方法:我们进行了回顾性研究,使用2002年至2022年的肺活量测定数据,跨四个中心的多中心研究。我们使用2005年和2022年ATS/ERS标准对肺活量测定结果进行分类,并根据GLI2012方程(高加索子集)计算预测值。
    结果:在79,039名受试者中,我们观察到23%从2005年标准下的阻塞性诊断转变为2022年标准下的混合模式诊断,需要肺容量评估。在59,203项测试中评估支气管扩张剂反应,根据新标准,最初被归类为响应者的12.3%被重新归类为非响应者。我们发现不同年龄段的严重程度分类存在差异,根据2022年标准,年龄较大的患者倾向于接受较温和的严重程度分类,而年龄较小的患者倾向于接受较高的严重程度分类。
    结论:2022年文件强调早期肺容量评估,可能导致更复杂测试的利用率增加。此外,支气管扩张剂反应在极端年龄组和轻度肺活量损害患者中占主导地位.这种转变可能会影响治疗决策,在较温和的病例中可能开始用药,在较严重的病例中可能降低治疗水平。
    BACKGROUND: Pulmonary function tests are vital for diagnosing lung diseases, assessing treatment responses, and monitoring respiratory health. Recent updates to interpretive standards by the European Respiratory and American Thoracic Societies (ERS/ATS) in 2022 introduced significant changes compared to the 2005 standards. They include incorporating lung volume measurements, non-specific and mixed disorders, introducing z-scores for functional abnormality assessment, reducing severity categories from five to three, and revising criteria for positive bronchodilator responses.
    METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multi-center study across four centers using spirometric data spanning from 2002 to 2022. We categorized spirometry results using both the 2005 and 2022 ATS/ERS standards and calculated predicted values following the GLI 2012 equation (Caucasian subset).
    RESULTS: Among 79,039 subjects, we observed that 23% shifted from an obstructive diagnosis under the 2005 standard to a mixed pattern diagnosis under the 2022 standard, necessitating lung volume assessments. In the evaluation of bronchodilator responses among 59,203 tests, 12.3% of those initially classified as responders were reclassified as non-responders with the new standards. We found variations in severity categorization across age groups, with older patients tending to receive milder severity classifications and younger individuals receiving greater severity classifications under the 2022 standards.
    CONCLUSIONS: The 2022 document emphasizes early lung volume assessment, potentially leading to increased utilization of more complex tests. Furthermore, the bronchodilator response was predominant in extreme age groups and among individuals with milder spirometric impairments. This shift may impact treatment decisions, potentially initiating medication in milder cases and de-escalating treatment in more severe cases.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:磺胺多辛-乙胺嘧啶(SP),作为青蒿琥酯的合作伙伴,ACT是印度大部分地区无并发症恶性疟原虫感染的首选治疗方法,而SP耐药有可能导致ACT失败.在缺乏对SP治疗效果的稳健监测的情况下,验证SP抗性的分子标记提供了SP失败的提示。然而,报告这些经过验证的标记物的研究通常会遇到某些陷阱,需要仔细解释。
    方法:分析了最近的一项研究和其他研究对印度经WHO验证的SP抗性分子标记进行的结果及其报告的解释,并在此介绍了研究和报告这些标记的主要问题。有人指出,几乎所有的研究都分析了使用上的缺陷,研究SP突变的标准化分类的估计和/或解释。这些缺陷不仅赋予已发布数据的时空不可比性,而且有可能被误解和错误翻译。
    结论:基于研究中的普遍问题,报告和解释来自SP抗性分子标记研究的数据,强调未来的研究应谨慎进行,以便产生有力的证据并正确转化为政策。
    BACKGROUND: Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP), as a partner to artesunate as ACT is the treatment of choice for uncomplicated P. falciparum infections in the majority of India and SP-resistance has a potential to lead to ACT failure. In the lack of robust surveillance of therapeutic efficacy of SP, validate molecular markers of SP-resistance offer a hint of failing SP. However, studies reporting these validated markers often suffer from certain pitfalls that warrant a careful interpretation.
    METHODS: Critical analyses of the results and their reported interpretations from a recent study and other studies conducted on the WHO-validated molecular markers of SP-resistance in India were analysed and the main problems with studying and reporting of these markers are presented here. It was noted that almost all studies analysed flawed either on the usage, estimation and/or interpretation of the standardized classification of the studies SP mutations. These flaws not only impart spatiotemporal incomparability of the published data but also have the potential of being misunderstood and wrongly translated.
    CONCLUSIONS: Based on this universal problem in studying, reporting and interpreting the data from the studies on molecular markers of SP-resistance, it is stressed that the future studies should be conducted with utmost caution so that robust evidence may be generated and correctly translated to policy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    作者提供了Winnicott\(1967)的“镜子-母亲和家庭在儿童发展中的角色”的创造性阅读。“温尼科特提出了这样的想法,即婴儿作为自己的生命过程中的关键体验是母亲与婴儿的沟通,从她的眼神看,当她看着他时,她看到了什么。在没有被看见的经验的情况下,婴儿感受真实而活着的萎缩的能力。作者充实了温尼科特的思想,建议婴儿在母亲眼中看到自己时,就像婴儿变得更加完整一样,也是,当她在婴儿的眼中看到自己时,母亲变得更加完整。温尼科特对精神分析的范式转变反映在他提出的临床工作中:(1)精神分析的目标不再是患者自我理解的丰富;相反,分析的目标是病人来更充分地活着自己;和(2)分析师帮助病人实现这一目的不是通过作出精明的解释,而是通过让病人体验到他或她自己的发现的乐趣。
    The author offers a creative reading of Winnicott\'s (1967) \"Mirror-role of mother and family in child development.\" Winnicott presents the idea that a pivotal experience in the process of the infant\'s coming into being as himself is the mother\'s communicating to the infant, by the look in her eyes, what she sees there when she looks at him. In the absence of the experience of being seen, the infant\'s capacity to feel real and alive atrophies. The author fleshes out Winnicott\'s thinking by suggesting that just as the infant comes more fully into being as he sees himself in his mother\'s eyes, so too, the mother comes more fully into being as a mother as she sees herself in the infant\'s eyes. The paradigm shift that Winnicott has contributed to psychoanalysis is reflected in the clinical work he presents: (1) the goal of psychoanalysis is no longer the enrichment of the patient\'s self-understanding; rather, the analytic goal is the patient\'s coming more fully alive to himself; and (2) the analyst helps the patient achieve this end not by making astute interpretations but by allowing the patient to experience the pleasure of making discoveries of his or her own.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Letter
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    乙醇血液分析是法医毒理学中最常见的要求,一些研究指出,在大约三分之一的非自然死亡中,有积极的结果。然而,区分清醒死亡和醉酒死亡并不像看起来那么简单。这种技术,临床,并建议法医学解释来解释乙醇的毒理学结果,讨论一些必须考虑的文物和陷阱,即专注于在影响下驾驶。这项工作提出了一种实用和客观的方法,旨在缓解与临床相关的复杂性,生理,病理生理学,和毒理学方面,以增进理解,实用性,及其内容的适用性,尤其是法院。特别是身体的身体完整性,死后的时间间隔,腐败的迹象,采血的解剖位置,替代样品,如玻璃体液和尿液,死后再分配的可能性,容器中含有防腐剂,和装运的最佳温度条件是需要注意的一些方面。尽管已经提出了几种与死后微生物乙醇生产相关的生物标志物,由于其应用和分析困难的不确定性,将其转化为法医常规的实施速度很慢。具体来说,在解释乙醇毒理学结果时,“不是所有可以计数的东西都可以计数,也不是所有可以计数的东西都可以计数”(归因于阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦)。
    Ethanol blood analysis is the most common request in forensic toxicology, and some studies point to positive results in approximately one-third of all unnatural deaths. However, distinguishing sober deaths from drunk deaths is not as simple as it may seem. This technical, clinical, and forensic interpretation is proposed to interpret the ethanol toxicological results, discussing several artefacts and pitfalls that must be considered, namely focusing on driving under the influence. This work is presented with a practical and objective approach, aiming to alleviate the complexities associated with clinical, physiological, pathophysiological, and toxicological aspects to enhance comprehension, practicality, and applicability of its content, especially to courts. Particularly the physical integrity of the body, the postmortem interval, putrefactive signs, anatomic place of blood collection, alternative samples such as vitreous humour and urine, the possibility of postmortem redistribution, the inclusion of preservatives in containers, and optimal temperature conditions of shipment are among some of the aspects to pay attention. Although several biomarkers related to postmortem microbial ethanol production have been proposed, their translation into forensic routine is slow to be implemented due to the uncertainties of their application and analytical difficulties. Specifically, in the interpretation of ethanol toxicological results, \"not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted\" (attributed to Albert Einstein).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    肺功能测试(PFTs)在诊断和管理广泛的呼吸系统疾病中至关重要。这些测试提供了对肺部健康的重要见解,指导诊断,评估疾病严重程度,并制定患者管理策略。这篇综述解决了解释PFT数据所固有的复杂性和细微差别,特别是根据欧洲呼吸学会(ERS)和美国胸科学会(ATS)的最新消息。这些更新有完善的解释策略,从肺活量测定的明确诊断使用转向更概率的方法,该方法通过使用Z评分和正常下限(LLN)更好地解释个体差异.重要的是,这篇叙述性评论深入探讨了肺活量测定解释的哲学转变,强调了从直接临床诊断到更细致的评估的转变,旨在确定疾病的可能性。它批评了对固定比率的依赖,并强调需要考虑人口统计学变量的参考值,例如年龄,性别,高度,和种族,符合最新的全球肺功能倡议(GLI)方程。尽管取得了这些进展,在确保不同预测模型和参考方程的一致性方面仍然存在挑战,这会影响解释的准确性和一致性。本文提出了一个简化的三步框架来解释PFT,旨在统一和简化流程,以提高各个医学专业的清晰度和可靠性。这种方法不仅有助于准确的患者评估,还可以减轻误诊的可能性,并确保更有效的患者管理。通过综合当代指南和整合强大的生理原理,这项审查促进了一种标准化而灵活的PFT解释方法,该方法在科学上是合理的,实际上是可行的。
    Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) are pivotal in diagnosing and managing a broad spectrum of respiratory disorders. These tests provide critical insights into lung health, guiding diagnoses, assessing disease severity, and shaping patient management strategies. This review addresses the complexities and nuances inherent in interpreting PFT data, particularly in light of recent updates from the European Respiratory Society (ERS) and American Thoracic Society (ATS). These updates have refined interpretive strategies, moving away from definitive diagnostic uses of spirometry to a more probabilistic approach that better accounts for individual variability through the use of Z-scores and lower limits of normal (LLNs). Significantly, this narrative review delves into the philosophical shift in spirometry interpretation, highlighting the transition from direct clinical diagnostics to a more nuanced evaluation geared towards determining the likelihood of disease. It critiques the reliance on fixed ratios and emphasizes the need for reference values that consider demographic variables such as age, sex, height, and ethnicity, in line with the latest Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) equations. Despite these advances, challenges remain in ensuring uniformity across different predictive models and reference equations, which can affect the accuracy and consistency of interpretations. This paper proposes a streamlined three-step framework for interpreting PFTs, aiming to unify and simplify the process to enhance clarity and reliability across various medical specialties. This approach not only aids in accurate patient assessments but also mitigates the potential for misdiagnosis and ensures more effective patient management. By synthesizing contemporary guidelines and integrating robust physiological principles, this review fosters a standardized yet flexible approach to PFT interpretation that is both scientifically sound and practically feasible.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    尽管存在教育计划,但心电图(ECG)的解释技能仍然很差。我们试图评估使用主观评分系统来评估儿科心脏病学研究员提交的ECG解释的准确性的有效性。学员,和教师儿科心电图审查(pECGreview),基于网络的心电图解释培训计划。我们做了一个回顾,提交给pECGreview的答复的横断面研究。ECG解释由具有一定经验的四个人独立评估。使用3点量表评估准确性:对于一般正确的解释,100%50%为轻微心电图异常的过度诊断或诊断不足,主要心电图异常的过度诊断或诊断不足为0%。使用扩大的Bland-Altman地块评估了评估者之间的协议,皮尔逊相关系数,和类内相关系数(ICC)。分析了192名参与者的1460次心电图解释。107名参与者解释了至少五个心电图。平均准确率为76.6±13.7%。参与者的正确率为66.1±5.1%,在21.5±4.6%的解释中有轻微的过度诊断或诊断不足,在12.3±3.9%的解释中有严重的过度诊断或诊断不足。评估者之间的协议验证表明协议限制为11.3%。评分者之间的一致性表现出一致的模式(所有相关性≥0.75)。绝对一致性为0.74(95%CI0.69-0.80),平均措施协议为0.92(95%CI0.89-0.94)。提交给pECGreview的仅五种ECG解释的准确性评分分析产生了良好的评分者间可靠性,可用于评估和排名儿科心脏病学研究员在培训中的ECG解释技能。
    The skill of interpretation of the electrocardiogram (ECG) remains poor despite existing educational initiatives. We sought to evaluate the validity of using a subjective scoring system to assess the accuracy of ECG interpretations submitted by pediatric cardiology fellows, trainees, and faculty to the Pediatric ECG Review (pECGreview), a web-based ECG interpretation training program. We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study of responses submitted to pECGreview. ECG interpretations were assessed independently by four individuals with a range of experience. Accuracy was assessed using a 3-point scale: 100% for generally correct interpretations, 50% for over- or underdiagnosis of minor ECG abnormalities, and 0% for over- or underdiagnosis of major ECG abnormalities. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using expanded Bland-Altman plots, Pearson correlation coefficients, and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC). 1460 ECG interpretations by 192 participants were analyzed. 107 participants interpreted at least five ECGs. The mean accuracy score was 76.6 ± 13.7%. Participants were correct in 66.1 ± 5.1%, had minor over- or underdiagnosis in 21.5 ± 4.6% and major over- or underdiagnosis in 12.3 ± 3.9% of interpretations. Validation of agreement between evaluators demonstrated limits of agreement of 11.3%. Inter-rater agreement exhibited consistent patterns (all correlations ≥ 0.75). Absolute agreement was 0.74 (95% CI 0.69-0.80), and average measures agreement was 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.94). Accuracy score analysis of as few as five ECG interpretations submitted to pECGreview yielded good inter-rater reliability for assessing and ranking ECG interpretation skills in pediatric cardiology fellows in training.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号