↓ Skip to main content

Inter-rater reliability of distal ureteral diameter ratio compared to grade of VUR

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pediatric Urology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Inter-rater reliability of distal ureteral diameter ratio compared to grade of VUR
Published in
Journal of Pediatric Urology, December 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jpurol.2016.10.021
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Management of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) remains controversial, and reflux grade constitutes an important prognostic factor. Recent work has suggested that distal ureteral diameter ratio (UDR) is a predictive factor relative to clinical outcome independent of grade. Previous studies have noted significant inter-rater variability with grading of VUR. The present study compared inter-rater reliability of reflux grade and UDR in children with primary VUR. Four pediatric urologists independently reviewed, in a blinded fashion, voiding cystourethrograms. For each renal unit, grade was assigned according to the standardized international scale. The UDR was calculated by dividing the largest ureteral diameter within the false pelvis by the distance between L1-L3 vertebral bodies. Correlation within each rater was determined using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Reliability of VUR grade and UDR were calculated using two-way ANOVA model inter-rater agreement. Four independent raters reliably measured VUR grade (ICC = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.78-0.93) and UDR (ICC = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.92-0.97). While UDR and grade were equally reliable measures, UDR had a tighter confidence interval. For each rater, grade and UDR were well correlated (r = 0.73-0.84; P < 0.0001). For higher-grade reflux, grade was more variable than UDR (Summary Figure). Using empirical thresholds, the increased variability of grade compared with UDR may lead to significant differences in clinical decision-making among physicians (P = 0.022). Known discordance with grading reflux emphasizes the need for a more objective VUR measurement, as clinicians and parents often opt for clinical intervention based on both clinical course and the likelihood of spontaneous resolution. While ICC for UDR and grade were not significantly different, the confidence intervals for grade were wider due to greater variability among grade measurements. This suggests that using UDR measurements may lead to more accurate characterization of VUR and ultimately more consistent clinical decision-making across providers. Ureteral diameter ratio has good inter-rater reliability among pediatric urologists, with less clinically relevant variability than VUR grade. Ureteral diameter ratio is a more objective and reliable measure than grade, and may be more useful in clinical decision-making.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Professor 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 18 50%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 19 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 December 2016.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pediatric Urology
#1,560
of 2,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,308
of 416,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pediatric Urology
#32
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,715 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. 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 416,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.