Lacson, Ronilda, Ali S Raja, David Osterbur, Ivan Ip, Louise Schneider, Paul Bain, Carol Mita, et al. 2016. “Assessing Strength of Evidence of Appropriate Use Criteria for Diagnostic Imaging Examinations.” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 23 (3) (January 17): 649–653. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocv194.
Objective For health information technology tools to fully inform evidence-based decisions, recommendations must be reliably assessed for quality and strength of evidence. We aimed to create an annotation framework for grading recommendations regarding appropriate use of diagnostic imaging examinations.
Methods The annotation framework was created by an expert panel (clinicians in three medical specialties, medical librarians, and biomedical scientists) who developed a process for achieving consensus in assessing recommendations, and evaluated by measuring agreement in grading the strength of evidence for 120 empirically selected recommendations using the Oxford Levels of Evidence.
Results Eighty-two percent of recommendations were assigned to Level 5 (expert opinion). Inter-annotator agreement was 0.70 on initial grading (κ = 0.35, 95% CI, 0.23-0.48). After systematic discussion utilizing the annotation framework, agreement increased significantly to 0.97 (κ = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.77-0.99).
Conclusions A novel annotation framework was effective for grading the strength of evidence supporting appropriate use criteria for diagnostic imaging exams.
JAMIA's website states VOR can be posted to an IR (as of 3/10/18): Self-archiving
Under the terms of the license, authors are entitled to deposit the final published version of their article in institutional and/or centrally organized repositories immediately upon publication, provided that the journal and OUP are attributed as the original place of publication and that correct citation details are given. Authors are also strongly encouraged to deposit the URL of their published article, in addition to the PDF version.