Inter-observer and intra-observer variability of the Oxford clinical cataract classification and grading system
- 1 January 1988
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in International Ophthalmology
- Vol. 11 (3), 151-157
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00130616
Abstract
Intra-observer (within observers) and inter-observer (between observers) variability of the Oxford Clinical Cataract Classification and Grading System were studied. Twenty cataracts were examined and scored independently by four observers. On a separate occasion two of the observers repeated the assessments of the same cataracts in the absence of information from the initial observations. The chance corrected and weighted kappa statistics for observer agreement, both for inter-observer and intra-observer variability demonstrated satisfactory repeatibility of the cataract grading system. The overall intra-observer mean weighted kappa was χw = +0.68 (range SE χ = 0.012–0.052) and the overall inter-observer mean weighted kappa was χw = +0.55 (range SE χ = 0.011–0.043).This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Oxford Clinical Cataract Classification and Grading SystemInternational Ophthalmology, 1986
- ASSESSMENT OF OBSERVER VARIABILITY IN THE CLASSIFICATION OF HUMAN CATARACTS1982
- I. IntroductionSurvey of Ophthalmology, 1980
- Observer variation in ophthalmology.British Journal of Ophthalmology, 1980
- The Framingham Eye Study monograph: An ophthalmological and epidemiological study of cataract, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, macular degeneration, and visual acuity in a general population of 2631 adults, 1973-1975.1980
- Diagnostic standardizationClinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 1979
- The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical DataBiometrics, 1977
- Standardizing Diagnostic ProceduresAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology, 1975
- Inter-rater Reliability of Ward Rating ScalesThe British Journal of Psychiatry, 1974
- Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit.Psychological Bulletin, 1968