You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 46 No. 3, March 1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Interobserver Agreement in the Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis

Alessandra Solari, MD; Graziella Filippini, MD; Luigi Gagliardi, MD; Luciana Bevilacqua, MD; Aldo Amantini, MD; Giorgio Giuliani, MD; Corrado Messina, MD; Giorgio Rossi, MD; Giovanni Savettieri, MD; Giovanni Tredici, MD; Pier Giorgio Duca, MD

Arch Neurol. 1989;46(3):289-292.


Abstract

• Interobserver agreement in the clinical diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) among six neurologists was evaluated. Three of them participated in a study of the clinical diagnosis of MS, the Italian Multicenter Study (IMS). The raters examined the clinical forms of MS of 50 patients randomly selected from among 430 patients recruited from the IMS. For each patient, neurologists were asked to make a diagnosis according to the McDonald-Halliday classification system of MS. The overall agreement on the diagnosis (MS present or absent) was fair, with no difference noted between the two groups of raters. Considering the six diagnostic levels instead, the reliability was higher for the neurologists participating in the IMS program. These neurologists agreed particularly on the Clinically Definite and Progressive Possible classifications. Complete disagreement was observed for the Early Probable or Latent and Progressive Probable classifications. Because of the different level of agreement on diagnosis, we suggest separate consideration of Clinically Definite and Progressive Probable MS cases in clinical trials and epidemiologic studies of this disease.



Author Affiliations

From the Neurological Institute "Carlo Besta," Milan, Italy (Drs Solari and Filippini); the Department of Pediatrics, General Hospital, Lecco, Italy (Dr Gagliardi); the Department of Neurology, Niguarda Hospital, Milan (Dr Bevilacqua); the Department of Neurophysiology, University of Florence (Italy) and Careggi Hospital, Florence (Dr Amantini); the Department of Neurology, General Hospital, Ancona, Italy (Dr Giuliani); the Department of Neurology, University of Messina (Italy) (Dr Messina); the Department of Neurology, General Hospital, Rovereto, Italy (Dr Rossi); the Department of Neurology, University of Palermo (Italy) (Dr Savettieri); the Department of Anatomy, University of Milan (Dr Tredici); and the Department of Biometrics, University of Milan (Dr Duca).


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Aug 3, 1988.

Reprint requests to Neurological Institute "Carlo Besta," via Celoria 11, 20133 Milan, Italy (Dr Solari).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Interobserver agreement on Poser's and the new McDonald's diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis
Zipoli et al.
Mult Scler 2003;9:481-485.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1989 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.