Assessment of agreement of a quantitative variable: a new graphical approach.

In clinical or epidemiologic research, the measurement of variables always implies some degree of error. Because it is impossible to control the various sources of variation, the assessment of the reliability of a measurement is essential. Otherwise, concordance analysis must take into account the "clinical" interpretation of the measurement under study, because its practical usefulness is of central importance. In this article, we propose a new approach to assess the reliability of a quantitative measurement. We use a graphical approach familiar to statisticians and data analysts of the biomedical area, associating to it the useful feature of interpretation based on the proportion of concordant cases. We believe that the proposed graphical approach can serve as a complement, or as a alternative, to the Altman-Bland method for agreement analysis. It allows a simple interpretation of agreement that takes into account the "clinical" importance of the differences between observers or methods. In addition, it allows the analysis of reliability or agreement, by means of survival analysis techniques.

[1]  D. Altman,et al.  A note on the use of the intraclass correlation coefficient in the evaluation of agreement between two methods of measurement. , 1990, Computers in biology and medicine.

[2]  J. Carlin,et al.  Bias, prevalence and kappa. , 1993, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[3]  J S Krouwer,et al.  A simple, graphical method to evaluate laboratory assays. , 1995, European journal of clinical chemistry and clinical biochemistry : journal of the Forum of European Clinical Chemistry Societies.

[4]  R. Gräsbeck,et al.  Reference values. , 1989, Advances in clinical chemistry.

[5]  E. O’Brien,et al.  An outline of the revised British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. , 1993, Journal of hypertension.

[6]  V M Chinchilli,et al.  A generalized concordance correlation coefficient for continuous and categorical data , 2001, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  J J Bartko,et al.  Measures of agreement: a single procedure. , 1994, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies , 1983 .

[9]  G. Ferraris,et al.  Clinical assessment of gestational age in the newborn infant. Comparison of two methods. , 1981, Early human development.

[10]  Ørnulf Borgan Kaplan–Meier Estimator , 2005 .

[11]  M. Szklo,et al.  Epidemiology: Beyond the Basics , 1999 .

[12]  R. Müller,et al.  A critical discussion of intraclass correlation coefficients. , 1994, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  D. Altman,et al.  Measuring agreement in method comparison studies , 1999, Statistical methods in medical research.

[14]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[15]  D. Streiner,et al.  Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to thier development and use , 1989 .

[16]  E M Wright,et al.  Calculating reference intervals for laboratory measurements , 1999, Statistical methods in medical research.

[17]  J O Westgard,et al.  Use and interpretation of common statistical tests in method-comparison studies. , 1973, Clinical chemistry.

[18]  Katherine L. Monti,et al.  Folded Empirical Distribution Function Curves—Mountain Plots , 1995 .

[19]  A. Silman,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures. , 1992, BMJ.