Detecting radiological changes in rheumatoid arthritis that are considered important by clinical experts: Influence of reading with or without known sequence

Journal of Rheumatology

Volumn 29, Issue 11, 2002, Pages 2306-2312

  Bruynesteyn, Karin ^a   Der Heijde, Désirée Van ^a   Boers, Maarten ^a   Saudan, Ariane ^a   Peloso, Paul ^a   Paulus, Harold ^a   Houben, Harry ^a   Griffiths, Bridget ^a   Edmonds, John ^a   Bresnihan, Barry ^a   Boonen, Annelies ^a   Van Der Linden, Sjef ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Clinically important difference; Radiographic scoring methods; Radiographs; Reading order; Rheumatoid arthritis; Smallest detectable difference

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; CHRONOLOGY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DISEASE COURSE; HUMAN; MEDICAL EXPERT; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ARTHRITIS, RHEUMATOID; ARTHROGRAPHY; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; JOINTS; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREVALENCE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0036843990     PISSN: 0315162X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Fries JF, Bloch DA, Sharp JT, et al. Assessment of radiologic progression in rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 1986;29:1-9.
2. Ferrara R, Priolo F, Cammisa M, et al. Clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis: Methodological suggestions for assessing radiographs arising from the Grisar study. Ann Rheum Dis 1997;56:608-12.
3. Salaffi F, Carotti M. Interobserver variation in quantitative analysis of hand radiographs in rheumatoid arthritis: Comparison of 3 different reading procedures. J Rheumatol 1997;24:2055-6.
4. van der Heijde D, Boonen A, Boers M, Kostense P, van der Linden S. Reading radiographs in chronological order, in pairs or as single films has important implications for the discriminative power of rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Rheumatology Oxford 1999;38:1213-20.
5. van der Heijde D. How to read radiographs according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method. J Rheumatol 2000;27:261-3.
6. Scott DL, Houssien DA, Laasonen L. Proposed modification to Larsen's scoring methods for hand and wrist radiographs. Br J Rheumatol 1995;34:56.
7. Bruynesteyn K, van der Heijde D, Boers M, et al. Determination of the minimal clinically important difference in rheumatoid arthritis joint damage of the Sharp/van der Heijde and Larsen Scott scoring methods by clinical experts and comparison with the smallest detectable difference. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:913-20.
8. van der Heijde DM. Plain X-rays in rheumatoid arthritis: overview of scoring methods, their reliability and applicability. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol 1996;10:435-53.
9. Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978;8:283-98.
10. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-10.
11. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measurement error. BMJ 1996;313:744.
12. Lassere M, Boers M, van der Heijde D, et al. Smallest detectable difference in radiological progression. J Rheumatol 1999;26:731-9.
13. Gardner M, Altman D. Statistics with Confidence: Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines. London: British Medical Journal; 1989.
14. Lantz CA, Nebenzahl E. Behavior and interpretation of the kappa statistic: Resolution of the two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:431-44.
15. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:543-9.