Assessing repeatability and reproducibility of Anterior Active Rhinomanometry (AAR) in children

Assessing repeatability and reproducibility of Anterior Active Rhinomanometry (AAR) in children

Repeatability and reproducibility are essential for clinicians for several purposes. Although discouraged, use of the Coefficient of Variation (CV) for assessing repeatability and reproducibility, rather than the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), is still widespread. The aim of the present s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:BMC medical research methodology Vol. 20; no. 1; p. 86
Main Authors: Cilluffo, Giovanna, Zicari, Anna Maria, Ferrante, Giuliana, Malizia, Velia, Fasola, Salvatore, Duse, Marzia, De Castro, Giovanna, De Vittori, Valentina, Schiavi, Laura, Brindisi, Giulia, Petrelli, Paolo, La Grutta, Stefania
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 17-04-2020
BioMed Central
BMC
Subjects:
Airway management
Allergies
Anterior Active Rhinomanometry
Asthma
Children
Clinical medicine
Coefficient of Variation
Intraclass Correlation Coefficient
Manometry
Medical diagnosis
Medical research
Methods
Nose
Pediatrics
Repeatability
Reproducibility
Research methodology
Rhinitis
Simulation
Standard deviation
United States
Italy
Repeatability
Anterior Active Rhinomanometry
Children
Rhinitis
Intraclass Correlation Coefficient
Coefficient of Variation
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Repeatability and reproducibility are essential for clinicians for several purposes. Although discouraged, use of the Coefficient of Variation (CV) for assessing repeatability and reproducibility, rather than the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), is still widespread. The aim of the present study was to highlight how using inappropriate indices may lead to misleading results, and this is done by simulation study and using real data on Anterior Active Rhinomanometry (AAR) in both healthy children and ones with rhinitis. A simulation study was carried out to highlight how using inappropriate indices could be misleading. Then a comparison was made between CV and ICC to assess repeatability and reproducibility of AAR, for which previous studies have given underestimated results. AAR is recommended as the gold standard tool for measuring nasal resistance in clinical practice. A simulation study showed that the ICCs estimated from data generated assuming a true CV yielded results in agreement with estimated CVs; by contrast, if data were generated assuming a true ICC, CVs yielded conflicting results. For AAR, ICCs showed good repeatability, whereas CVs showed unacceptable repeatability. AUC and 95% CI for AAR showed good performance in predicting current symptoms of rhinitis in the overall study population. The present study focused on the importance of the choice of appropriate indices of repeatability and reproducibility, demonstrating the repeatability of AAR in both healthy children and ones with rhinitis. ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03286049; Registration Date: September 15, 2017; Actual Study Start Date: January 10, 2018).
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1471-2288
1471-2288
DOI:10.1186/s12874-020-00969-1