Kilian A H, Metzger W G, Mutschelknauss E J, Kabagambe G, Langi P, Korte R, von Sonnenburg F
Basic Health Services Project, Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit mbH (GTZ), Fort Portal, Uganda.
Trop Med Int Health. 2000 Jan;5(1):3-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3156.2000.00509.x.
To assess the interrater reproducibility of malaria microscopy in epidemiological studies, 711 thick blood films from population-based surveys were randomly selected and reread by 4 experienced microscopists. Sample estimates of the prevalence of P. falciparum infection, geometric mean parasite density and the proportion of samples above various parasite density cut-off levels were almost identical in the routine and quality control readings. Differences were, however, encountered in the sample estimates for gametocyte ratio, proportion of mixed infection and average density index. In all three cases the quality control result was significantly higher than the routine evaluation. On the level of the individual slide there was good interrater agreement for the presence of P. falciparum infections (Kappa index kappa = 0.79) which was even better when parasite densities between 4 and 100/microl were excluded (kappa = 0.94). With respect to the assessment of parasite density, a high level of disagreement was found. While the mean difference between the two readings was not different from 0, the second reading was between 0.12 and 10 times that of the first. However, the level of disagreement significantly fell with increasing parasite densities. Thus malaria microscopy is very reliable for the estimation of parasite ratios and geometric mean parasite densities within and between studies as long as the same methodology is used, but tends to underestimate the gametocyte ratio and proportion of mixed infections. Care must be taken, however, when individual parasite density is related to other explanatory variables, due to the high degree of variability in the parasite enumeration.
为评估疟疾显微镜检查在流行病学研究中的评分者间再现性,从基于人群的调查中随机选取了711份厚血膜,并由4名经验丰富的显微镜检查人员重新阅片。在常规阅片和质量控制阅片中,恶性疟原虫感染率、几何平均寄生虫密度以及寄生虫密度高于各种临界值水平的样本比例的样本估计值几乎相同。然而,在配子体比例、混合感染比例和平均密度指数的样本估计中发现了差异。在所有这三种情况下,质量控制结果均显著高于常规评估结果。在单张玻片水平上,对于恶性疟原虫感染的存在,评分者间一致性良好(卡帕指数κ = 0.79),当排除每微升4至100个的寄生虫密度时,一致性更好(κ = 0.94)。关于寄生虫密度的评估,发现存在高度分歧。虽然两次阅片的平均差异与0无显著差异,但第二次阅片结果是第一次的0.12至10倍。然而,随着寄生虫密度的增加,分歧程度显著下降。因此,只要使用相同的方法,疟疾显微镜检查在研究内部和研究之间对于寄生虫比例和几何平均寄生虫密度的估计非常可靠,但往往会低估配子体比例和混合感染比例。然而,由于寄生虫计数的高度变异性,在将个体寄生虫密度与其他解释变量相关联时必须谨慎。