Inter-Rater Reliability of EEG-Based Encephalopathy Grading
Résumé fourni par la source
PURPOSE: Visual EEG Confusion Assessment Method-Severity (VE-CAM-S) quantifies encephalopathy severity based on electroencephalography features. This study evaluated inter-rater reliability among experts using the VE-CAM-S scale. METHODS: Nine experts from six institutions independently reviewed 32 15-second electroencephalography samples in an online test, assessing 29 features (16 in the VE-CAM-S and 13 additional, or "VE-CAM-S+"). A consensus of three experts served as the gold standard. Performance was measured by the median Matthews correlation coefficient between expert and gold-standard VE-CAM-S+ scores, along with average sensitivity and specificity. Qualitative analysis identified common feature-recognition errors affecting scores. RESULTS: Experts achieved a median Matthews correlation coefficient of 0.82 [95% CI: 0.74-0.99]. Specificity exceeded 90% for most features except background β (87%) and generalized delta (71%). Sensitivity was ≥65% except for burst suppression with epileptiform activity (61%), extreme delta brush (EDB; 61%), posterior dominant rhythm (50%), background α (59%) and β (42%). Common errors included missing subtle findings, confusing features, and misidentifying extreme delta brush. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study offers some initial support for the reliability of VE-CAM-S+ scoring. The largest errors occurred when experts missed or falsely identified features with higher weight in the VE-CAM-S. Encephalopathy grading through VE-CAM-S may be improved by breaking high-stakes features into smaller parts, creating a "cheat sheet" with scored examples, and designing teaching materials.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Inter-Rater Reliability of EEG-Based Encephalopathy Grading
- Date Crossref
- 02/07/2025
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.