| Title |
Impact of acquisition and interpretation on total inter-observer variability in echocardiography: results from the quality assurance program of the STAAB cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10554-018-1315-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Caroline Morbach, Götz Gelbrich, Margret Breunig, Theresa Tiffe, Martin Wagner, Peter U. Heuschmann, Stefan Störk |
| Abstract |
Variability related to image acquisition and interpretation is an important issue of echocardiography in clinical trials. Nevertheless, there is no broadly accepted standard method for quality assessment of echocardiography in clinical research reports. We present analyses based on the echocardiography quality-assurance program of the ongoing STAAB cohort study (characteristics and course of heart failure stages A-B and determinants of progression). In 43 healthy individuals (mean age 50 ± 14 years; 18 females), duplicate echocardiography scans were acquired and mutually interpreted by one of three trained sonographers and an EACVI certified physician, respectively. Acquisition (AcV), interpretation (InV), and inter-observer variability (IOV; i.e., variability between the acquisition-interpretation sequences of two different observers), were determined for selected M-mode, B-mode, and Doppler parameters. We calculated Bland-Altman upper 95% limits of absolute differences, implying that 95% of measurement differences were smaller/equal to the given value: e.g. LV end-diastolic volume (mL): 25.0, 25.0, 27.9; septal e' velocity (cm/s): 3.03, 1.25, 3.58. Further, 90, 85, and 80% upper limits of absolute differences were determined for the respective parameters. Both, acquisition and interpretation, independently and sizably contributed to IOV. As such, separate assessment of AcV and InV is likely to aid in echocardiography training and quality-assurance. Our results further suggest to routinely determine IOV in clinical trials as a comprehensive measure of imaging quality. The derived 95, 90, 85, and 80% upper limits of absolute differences are suggested as reproducibility targets of future studies, thus contributing to the international efforts of standardization in quality-assurance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 21% |
| Researcher | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 32% |
| Psychology | 2 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 February 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#1,116
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#330,079
of 455,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#15
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 455,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.