Suppr超能文献

科马克-莱汉内分类法的可靠性:一项范围综述。

Reliability of the Cormack-Lehane Classification: A Scoping Review.

作者信息

Arkala Anoohya, Kaur Maninder, Rauscher Joseph, Carlson Jestin N, Nikolla Dhimitri A

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine / Emergency Medicine, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Erie, USA.

Department of Emergency Medicine, Allegheny Health Network, Erie, USA.

出版信息

Cureus. 2025 Mar 25;17(3):e81159. doi: 10.7759/cureus.81159. eCollection 2025 Mar.

Abstract

We aimed to find and describe studies estimating the reliability of the Cormack-Lehane and modified Cormack-Lehane classifications, using the kappa statistic (κ). We performed a scoping review searching PubMed as well as Google Scholar and Google.com (gray literature) between October 2024 and January 2025 for published studies without date or language restrictions reporting a κ for Cormack-Lehane grades between at least two raters. We screened 825 records in PubMed and 1,200 in the gray literature of which 15 articles ultimately met our inclusion criteria. Most studies used still images (n=6) and pre-recorded videos (n=8) obtained from a direct (n=5), video (n=5), or fiberoptic (n=4) laryngoscopy (one used both direct and video) performed by clinicians from multiple specialties on patients in the operating room (n=8), simulation (n=2), office (n=3), and prehospital (n=1) settings (one unknown). Studies examined both the Cormack-Lehane classification (n=10) and the modified classification (n=6). Inter-rater reliability ranged from slight to almost perfect, κ from 0.020 to 0.888. The evidence examining the reliability of the Cormack-Lehane and modified Cormack-Lehane classifications is limited with heterogeneous methods and results.

摘要

我们旨在寻找并描述使用kappa统计量(κ)评估Cormack-Lehane分级和改良Cormack-Lehane分级可靠性的研究。我们进行了一项范围综述,于2024年10月至2025年1月期间在PubMed以及谷歌学术和谷歌网站(灰色文献)上搜索已发表的研究,这些研究无日期或语言限制,报告了至少两名评估者之间Cormack-Lehane分级的κ值。我们在PubMed中筛选了825条记录,在灰色文献中筛选了1200条记录,其中15篇文章最终符合我们的纳入标准。大多数研究使用了静态图像(n = 6)和预先录制的视频(n = 8),这些图像和视频来自多个专业的临床医生在手术室(n = 8)、模拟环境(n = 2)、办公室(n = 3)和院前环境(n = 1)(1项未知)中通过直接喉镜检查(n = 5)、视频喉镜检查(n = 5)或纤维喉镜检查(n = 4)(1项同时使用了直接喉镜检查和视频喉镜检查)获取。研究同时考察了Cormack-Lehane分级(n = 10)和改良分级(n = 6)。评估者间信度从轻微到几乎完美不等,κ值从0.020至0.888。考察Cormack-Lehane分级和改良Cormack-Lehane分级可靠性的证据有限,方法和结果存在异质性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/430b/12020663/a8081a4b5313/cureus-0017-00000081159-i01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验