作者: M. A. Coelho Neto , P. Roncato , C. O. Nastri , W. P. Martins
DOI: 10.1002/UOG.14654
关键词: Reproducibility 、 Clinical Practice 、 Obstetrics and gynaecology 、 Kappa 、 MEDLINE 、 Concordance 、 Medicine 、 Reliability (statistics) 、 Ultrasound techniques 、 Medical physics 、 Gynecology
摘要: Objectives To examine the quality of methods used and accuracy interpretation agreement in existing studies that reliability ultrasound measurements judgments obstetrics gynecology. Methods A systematic search MEDLINE was performed on 25 March 2014, looking for examined gynecology with evaluation concordance (CCC) or intraclass (ICC) correlation coefficients kappa as a main objective. Results Seven hundred thirty-three records were basis their title abstract, which 141 full-text articles completely eligibility. We excluded 29 because they did not report CCC/ICC/kappa, leaving 112 included our analysis. Two reported both ICC counted twice, therefore, number denominator analyses 114. Only 16/114 (14.0%) considered to be well designed (independent acquisition blinded analysis) have interpreted results properly. Most errors occurring are likely overestimate method examined. Conclusions The vast majority published had important flaws design, and/or reporting. Such limitations identify might create false confidence judgments, jeopardizing clinical practice future research. Specific guidelines aimed at improving reproducibility should encouraged. Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.