Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of different reader and patient parameters on the degree of agreement and the rate of misclassification of vesicoureteric reflux grading on last-image-hold frames in relation to spot-exposed frames from voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) as well as to determine the nature of reflux misclassification on last-image-hold frames. Blinded readers conducted a retrospective evaluation of last-image-hold and spot-exposed frames of the renal fossae from 191 sequential VCUG examinations performed during a five-year period. Kappa tests were used to determine the agreement between reflux gradings and to assess the impact of reader and patient parameters. Pearson product-moment correlations were used to evaluate the effect of patient parameters on reader level of certainty regarding reflux grading. We measured almost perfect overall agreement for more experienced readers and substantial overall agreement for less experienced readers. Point estimates of overall misclassification were less than 2% for more experienced readers and less than 4% for less experienced readers. The readers' level of certainty about reflux grading had a positive impact on agreement values and misclassification rates. Experienced readers' most common misclassification was assigning reflux a grade of 3 on a spot-exposed frame and a grade of 2 on an equivalent last-image-hold frame. Inexperienced readers' most common misclassification involved missing reflux altogether. Instances of grade 2 reflux on last-image-hold frames may warrant supplemental evaluation with spot-exposed frames. Otherwise, a reader's level of certainty regarding reflux grading on a last-image-hold frame may help determine whether a supplemental spot-exposed frame would be beneficial.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.20273 | DOI Listing |