Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by BRILLIANT, L. B.
Right arrow Articles by MUSCH, D. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by BRILLIANT, L. B.
Right arrow Articles by MUSCH, D. C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 118, No. 2: 265-279
Copyright © 1983 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health

other

RELIABILITY OF OPHTHALMIC DIAGNOSES IN AN EPIDEMIOLOGIC SURVEY1

LAWRENCE B. BRILLIANT2,3,, JAMES M. LEPKOWSKI4 and DAVID C. MUSCH5

2Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI 48109
3Seva Foundation Chelsea, MI
4Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI
5Department of Ophthalmology, Medical School, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI

Reprint requests to Dr. Brilliant.

Brilliant, L. B. (School of Public Health, U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Ml 48109), J. M. Lepkowski and D. C. Musch. Reliability of ophthalmic diagnoses in an epidemiologic survey. Am J Epidemiol 1983; 118: 265–79.

In the Nepal Blindness Survey, 39, 887 people in 105 sites were examined by 10 ophthalmologists from Nepal and four other countries during 1981. Ophthalmic protocols were pretested on approximately 3000 subjects; however, interobserver variability was inevitable. To quantify the amount of variability and assess the reliability of important ophthalmic measures, a study of interobserver agreement was conducted. Five ophthalmologists, randomly assigned to one of two examining stations in a single survey site, carried out 529 pairs of examinations. Eighty demographic and ophthalmic variables were assessed at each station. In 62 of 80 (77.5%) measures, observer agreement exceeded 90%. Since pathologic findings were rare, however, chance agreement alone could yield misleadingly high per cent agreement; therefore, the kappa statistic was used for assessing comparative reliability of ophthalmic measures. There were 74 measures for which kappa could be computed and ranked by strength of agreement: 20 (27%) showed excellent agreement (R = 0.75–1.00), 39 (53%) showed fair to good agreement (R = 0.40–0.74), and 15 (20%) showed poor agreement (R < 0.40). In general, measures dealing with blindness prevalence or causes of blindness showed substantial or almost perfect agreement, while polychotomous descriptions of rare clinical signs demonstrated less agreement.

epidemiologic methods; health surveys; ophthalmology

1From the Nepal Blindness Survey, an undertaking of the World Health Organization Prevention of Blindness Programme; the Ministry of Health, His Majesty's Government of Nepal; the Seva Foundation; and the University of Michigan.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.