Virginia has been a university English instructor for over 20 years. She specializes in helping people write essays faster and easier.
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Background Assessment of disagreement among multiple measurements for the same subject by different observers remains an important problem in medicine.
Several measures have been applied to assess observer agreement. However, problems arise when comparing the degree of observer agreement among different methods, populations or circumstances.
Methods The recently introduced information-based measure of disagreement IBMD is a useful tool for comparing the degree of observer disagreement. Since the proposed IBMD assesses disagreement between two observers only, we generalized this measure to include more than two observers.
Results Two examples one with real data and the other with hypothetical data were employed to illustrate the utility of the proposed measure in comparing the degree of disagreement.
Conclusion The IBMD allows comparison of the disagreement in non-negative ratio scales across different populations and the generalization presents a solution to evaluate data with different number of observers for different cases, an important issue in real situations.
The website is widely available to mathematicians, epidemiologists and physicians to facilitate easy application of this statistical strategy to their own data.
Background As several measurements in clinical practice and epidemiologic research are based on observations made by health professionals, assessment of the degree of disagreement among multiple measurements for the same subjects under similar circumstances by different observers remains a significant problem in medicine.
If the measurement error is assumed to be the same for every observer, independent of the magnitude of quantity, we can estimate within-subject variability for repeated measurements by the same subject with the within-subject standard deviation, and the increase in variability when different observers are applied using analysis of variance 1.
However this strategy is not appropriate for comparing the degree of observer disagreement among different populations or various methods of measurement.
Bland and Altman proposed a technique to compare the agreement between two methods of medical measurement allowing multiple observations per subject 2 and later Schluter proposed a Bayesian approach 3. However, problems arise when comparing the degree of observer disagreement between two different methods, populations or circumstances.
For example, one issue is whether during visual analysis of cardiotocograms, observer disagreement in estimation of the fetal heart rate baseline in the first hour of labor is significantly different from that in the last hour of labor when different observers assess the printed one-hour cardiotocography tracings.
Another issue that remains to be resolved is whether interobserver disagreement in head circumference assessment by neonatologists is less than that by nurses. To answer to this question, several neonatologists should evaluate the head circumference in the same newborns under similar circumstances, followed by calculation of the measure of interobserver agreement, and the same procedure repeated with different nurses.
Subsequently, the two interobserver agreement measures should be compared to establish whether interobserver disagreement in head circumference assessment by neonatologists is less than that by nurses. Occasionally, intraclass correlation coefficient ICCa measure of reliability, and not agreement 4 is frequently used to assess observer agreement in situations with multiple observers without knowing the differences between the numerous variations of the ICC 5.
Even when the appropriate form is applied to assess observer agreement, the ICC is strongly influenced by variations in the trait within the population in which it is assessed 6.
Consequently, comparison of ICC is not always possible across different populations. Moreover important inconsistencies can be found when ICC is used to assess agreement 7.
The Pearson coefficient of correlation assesses the closeness of data to the line of best fit, modified by taking into account the distance of this line from the degree line through the origin 89101112 Moreover, a number of limitations of ICC, such as comparability of populations and its dependence on the covariance between observers, described above, are also present in CCC Consequently, CCC and ICC to measure observer agreement from different populations are valid only when the measuring ranges are comparable The recently introduced information-based measure of disagreement IBMD provides a useful tool to compare the degree of observer disagreement among different methods, populations or circumstances However, the proposed measure assesses disagreement only between two observers, which presents a significant limitation in observer agreement studies.
This type of study generally requires more than just two observers, which constitutes a very small sample set. Here, we have proposed generalization of the information-based measure of disagreement for more than two observers. As sometimes in real situations some observers do not examine all the cases missing dataour generalized IBMD is set to allow different numbers of examiners for various observations.
In this context, the sum over all logarithms of possible outcomes of the variable is a valid measure of the amount of information, or uncertainty, contained in a variable A factor analysis suggests that an individual's views on these issues factor into a few underlying components that predict much of the variation in those views.
In this introduction we sketch the background to the recent philosophical discussions of these questions, and the location occupied therein by the articles Disagreement in. Introduction The dispute between rationalism and empiricism takes place within epistemology, the branch of philosophy devoted to studying the nature, sources and limits of knowledge.
The defining questions of epistemology include the following. 1 Familiarity theories, disagreements and methods of resolution Andrew Mayes Recollection and Familiarity • Recognition depends on two kinds of memory.
• Recollection is a form of recall in which studied information cues recall of associations that confirm that the information was.
Chapter topics cover an introduction to the ethical process, the resources for the ethical process, understanding alternative points of view, evaluating arguments from different ethical approaches, and the ethical process as an argumentative dialogue.
Similarly, the introduction of Bt crops capable of developing an insecticide within itself forced farmers to abandon the use of an extremely useful pesticide based on Bacillus thuringiensis. Rauch affirms that genetically-improved, drought-resistant crops would come .
Analysis Of The Sources Of Disagreement Essay Rauch, in the beginning of his article, points out several potential merits of agricultural biotechnology such production of transgenic seeds which can counteract the effects of herbicides () - Analysis Of The Sources Of Disagreement Essay introduction.