National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20850-1707, USA.
Ophthalmology. 2010 Nov;117(11):2112-9.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.02.033. Epub 2010 Jun 18.
To examine the grading (interrater) reliability of the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) Clinical Lens Grading System (ARLNS).
Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology.
One hundred fifty volunteers (284 eyes).
Participants with lens opacities of varying severity were independently graded at the slit lamp for cataract severity by 2 examiners (retinal or anterior segment specialists) using the ARLNS, which employs 3 standard photographs of increasing severity for classifying each of the 3 major types of opacity. Lens photographs were taken and graded at a reading center using the more detailed AREDS System for Classifying Cataracts from photographs.
The Pearson correlation, weighted-kappa, and limits-of-agreement statistics were used to assess the interrater agreement of the gradings.
Examinations were performed on 284 lenses (150 participants). Tests of interrater reliability between pairs of clinicians showed substantial agreement between clinicians for cortical and posterior subcapsular opacities and moderate agreement for nuclear opacities. A similar pattern and strength of agreement was present when comparing scores of retinal versus anterior segment specialists. Interrater agreement between clinical and reading center gradings was not as great as inter-clinician agreement.
Interrater agreements were in the moderate to substantial range for the clinical assessment of lens opacities. Inherent differences in cataract classification systems that rely on slit lamp vs photographic assessments of lens opacities may explain some of the disagreement noted between slit lamp and photographic gradings. Given the interrater reliability statistics for clinicians and the simplicity of the grading procedure, ARLNS is presented for use in studies requiring a simple, inexpensive method for detecting the presence and severity of the major types of lens opacities.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any of the materials discussed in this article.
检查年龄相关性眼病研究(AREDS)临床晶状体分级系统(ARLNS)的分级(组内)可靠性。
诊断测试或技术的评估。
150 名志愿者(284 只眼睛)。
两名检查者(视网膜或前段专家)在裂隙灯下使用 ARLNS 对晶状体混浊程度不同的参与者进行独立分级,ARLNS 采用 3 张逐渐加重严重程度的标准照片,用于对 3 种主要混浊类型中的每一种进行分类。使用更详细的 AREDS 系统对照片中的白内障进行分类,在阅读中心拍摄和分级晶状体照片。
使用 Pearson 相关系数、加权 Kappa 和一致性界限统计来评估分级的组内一致性。
对 284 只晶状体(150 名参与者)进行了检查。检查者之间的组内可靠性测试显示,对于皮质和后囊下混浊,检查者之间存在实质性一致,对于核混浊,存在中度一致。当比较视网膜与前段专家的评分时,也存在类似的一致性模式和强度。临床分级与阅读中心分级之间的组内一致性不如检查者之间的一致性。
对于晶状体混浊的临床评估,组内一致性处于中度至高度范围。基于裂隙灯和晶状体混浊的照片评估的白内障分类系统的固有差异可能解释了裂隙灯和照片分级之间注意到的一些差异。鉴于临床医生的组内可靠性统计数据以及分级程序的简单性,提出了 ARLNS 供使用,用于需要一种简单、经济的方法来检测主要类型晶状体混浊的存在和严重程度的研究。
作者在本文讨论的任何材料中均无专有权或商业利益。