Concordance inter-observateurs des diagnostics posés selon la classification CISP: À l'aide de situations cliniques réelles en médecine familiale

Canadian Family Physician

Volumn 44, Issue OCT., 1998, Pages 2128-2133

  Émond, Jean Guy ^a   Cauchon, Michel ^b   Quellet, Jean ^b   Beaulieu, Marie Dominique ^b   Brailovsky, Carlos A ^b   Leduc, Yvan ^b  

^a LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANADA; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUP; DOCUMENTATION; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; INFORMATION SYSTEM; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHYSICIANS, FAMILY; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; QUEBEC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SOFTWARE;

EID: 0032185746     PISSN: 0008350X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Lamberts H, Wood M. ICPC. International Classification of Primary Care. 2e éd. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987. p. 1-281.
2. Van Der Horst F, Metsemakers J, Vissers F, Saenger G, De Geus C. The reason-for-encounter mode of the ICPC: reliable, adequate, and feasible. Scand J Prim Health Care 1989;7:99-103.
3. Hofmans-Okkes I. At the GP's surgery. Views of patients about seeing their GPs. Dans: Hofmans-Okkes I, rédacteur. Op. het spreekuur. Lelystad: Meditekst; 1991. p. 57-65.
4. Bridges-Webb C. Classifying and coding morbidity in general practice: validity and reliability in an international trial. J Fam Pract 1986;23:147-50.
5. Gray D, Ward A, Underwood P, Fatovich B, Winkler R. Morbidity coding in general practice. J Fam Pract 1989;6:92-7.
6. Lamberts H, Meads S, Wood M. Classification of reasons why persons seek primary care. Pilot study of a new system. Public Health Rep 1984;99:597-605.
7. Rosenblatt RA, Gherkin DC, Schneeweiss R, Hart LG. The content of ambulatory medical care in the United States. N Engl J Med 1983;309:892-7.
8. Schappert MA. National ambulatory medical care survey: 1990 summary. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Services Centers for Disease Control; 1992. No. 213 (PHS 92-1250). p. 1-12.
9. Lamberts H. Episode-oriented epidemiology in family practice: the practical use of the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) as illustrated in patients with headache. In: Northon PG, Stewart M, Bass MJ, Dunn EV, rédacteurs. Primary care research. Traditional and innovative approaches. London: Sage Publications; 1991. p. 40-72.
10. Fleming DM, Cross KW, Garcia Olmos I, Crombie DL Changes in practice morbidity between the 1970 and 1981 national morbidity surveys. Br J Gen Pract 1991;41:202-6.
11. Bridges-Webb C. The Australian general practice morbidity and prescribing survey 1969 to 1974. Med J Aust 1976; (Suppl):1-28.
12. Maheux B, Pineault R, Lambert J, Béland F, Lévesque A. Les soins de première ligne au Québec profil des médecins omnipraticiens pratiquant en cabinet privé et en CLSC. Can J Public Health 1990;81:27-31.
13. Curry L, MacIntyre K. The content of family practice: do we need more studies? Can Fam Physician 1982;28:124-6.
14. Audio Visuel Centrum. C.I.S.P. programme d'entrainement, NTSC (version canadienne). Amsterdam: Université d'Amsterdam; 1992.
15. Elmore JG, Feinstein AR. A bibliography of publications on observer variability (final instalment). J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:567-80.
16. Hanley JA Standard error of the kappa statistic. Psychol Bull 1987;102:315-21.
17. Cichetti DV, Feinstein AR. High agreement, but low kappa: 2. Resolving the paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;43:551-8.
18. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74.
19. Fleiss JL Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1981. p. 212-36.
20. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa: 1. The problem of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990; 43:543-9.