Kelsey R M, Reiff S, Wiens S, Schneider T R, Mezzacappa E S, Guethlein W
Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Stony Brook 11794-2500, USA.
Psychophysiology. 1998 May;35(3):337-40. doi: 10.1017/s0048577298001310.
The interrater reliability and concurrent validity of two methods of scoring the ensemble-averaged impedance cardiogram were evaluated. Impedance cardiographic and electrocardiographic signals were recorded from 40 undergraduate men and women during a baseline rest period and a vocal mental arithmetic task period. Recordings were scored by four rates using a conventional method, involving ensemble averaging after careful editing of beat-to-beat waveforms, and a streamlined method, involving ensemble averaging without beat-to-beat editing. Intraclass correlations for interrater reliability exceeded .92, whereas intraclass correlations for concurrent validity exceeded .97, indicating excellent agreement between rates and scoring methods for all cardiac measures. The streamlined method was significantly faster than the conventional method. The results indicate that variations in beat-to-beat editing do not constitute a serious source of error in the ensemble-averaged impedance cardiogram and support the interrater reliability and concurrent validity of the two scoring methods.
对两种评分整体平均阻抗心动图方法的评分者间信度和同时效度进行了评估。在基线休息期和发声心算任务期，从40名本科男女中记录了阻抗心动图和心电图信号。记录由四名评分者使用传统方法进行评分，该方法包括在仔细编辑逐搏波形后进行整体平均，以及一种简化方法，即不进行逐搏编辑直接进行整体平均。评分者间信度的组内相关性超过0.92，而同时效度的组内相关性超过0.97，表明所有心脏测量指标在评分者和评分方法之间具有极好的一致性。简化方法比传统方法明显更快。结果表明，逐搏编辑的差异在整体平均阻抗心动图中不构成严重的误差来源，并支持两种评分方法的评分者间信度和同时效度。
