Comparison of centralized versus "site-based" measurement of angiographic stenosis for eligibility in the asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis study.
Comparison of centralized versus "site-based" measurement of angiographic stenosis for eligibility in the asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis study.
复制标题
无症状颈动脉粥样硬化研究中血管造影狭窄的集中测量与“基于部位”测量的比较。
DOI：
10.1097/00004424-199607000-00007
复制
发表时间：
1996
影响因子：
6.7
通讯作者：
Toole,JF
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dean,BL;Lefkowitz,DS;Howard,VJ;Frey,JF;Schwartz,S;Chambless,LE;Heiserman,JE;Feinberg,WM;Toole,JF
理由和目的作者通过血管造影研究确定了多中心前瞻性无症状颈动脉粥样硬化研究中患者血管造影狭窄集中与非集中（基于现场）测量的可靠性。方法计算244张隐蔽性和前瞻性解释的血管造影图像的一致性和相关性，以比较来自同一血管造影研究的集中式和非集中式阅读器测量颈动脉狭窄百分比。对这些读数计算狭窄百分比差异的单变量汇总统计。结果33个中心与指定中心阅读器比较，狭窄≥60%和≥80%的读数一致性分别为88.5%和91.8%，kappa统计量分别为0.77和0.73。指定中心阅读器与第二中心阅读器的比较得出的一致性百分比分别为85.0%和86.5%，对于从原始组中选择的动脉，狭窄度≥60%和≥80%的kappa统计分别为0.69和0.41。因此，报名中心与指定中心阅读者之间的一致性略好于两个中心阅读者之间的一致性。结论集中式和非集中式（基于现场的）血管造影测量狭窄的方法，在制定质量控制措施以确保统一适用资格标准的情况下，对于大型、前瞻性、隐蔽的多中心试验同样可靠。
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVESThe authors determine the reliability of centralized versus noncentralized (site-based) measurement of angiographic stenosis of patients enrolled into the multicenter, prospective, Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study by angiographic studies.METHODSPercent agreements and correlations of 244 masked and prospectively interpreted angiograms were calculated for comparison of centralized and noncentralized readers measuring the percent carotid stenosis from the same angiographic studies. Univariate summary statistics for differences in percent stenoses were calculated for these readings.RESULTSAgreement between readings were 88.5% and 91.8% with kappa statistics of 0.77 and 0.73 for≥ 60% and≥ 80% stenosis, respectively, for comparison of 33 centers to the designated central reader. Comparison between the designated central reader and a second central reader derived percent agreements of 85.0% and 86.5% with kappa statistics of 0.69 and 0.41 for≥ 60% and≥ 80% stenoses, respectively, for arteries selected from the original group. Hence, agreement was slightly better between the enrolling centers and the designated central reader than between the two central readers.CONCLUSIONSBoth centralized and noncentralized (site-based) methods of angiographic measurement of stenosis are equally reliable for large, prospective, masked, multicenter trials when quality control measures are instituted to ensure uniform application of eligibility criteria.
登录
查看更多内容
中期评估
影响因子：
9.9
作者：
L. Wilkins
通讯作者：
L. Wilkins
无症状颈动脉狭窄的颈动脉手术与药物治疗
影响因子：
8.3
作者：
L. Wilkins
通讯作者：
L. Wilkins
颈动脉内膜切除术治疗无症状动脉粥样硬化的随机前瞻性试验的研究设计。
影响因子：
8.3
作者：
通讯作者：
--
评估颅外颈动脉狭窄的观察者变异性。
影响因子：
8.3
作者：
Chikos,PM;Fisher,LD;Hirsch,JH;Harley,JD;Thiele,BL;StrandnessJr,DE
通讯作者：
StrandnessJr,DE
颈动脉内膜切除术在无症状颈动脉狭窄中的作用
影响因子：
8.3
作者：
L. Wilkins
通讯作者：
L. Wilkins