The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring interrater reliability among multiple raters: An example of methods for nominal data
Abstract
This paper reviews and critiques various approaches to the measurement of reliability among multiple raters in the case of nominal data. We consider measurement of the overall reliability of a group of raters (using kappa‐like statistics) as well as the reliability of individual raters with respect to a group. We introduce modifications of previously published estimators appropriate for measurement of reliability in the case of stratified sampling frames and we interpret these measures in view of standard errors computed using the jackknife. Analyses of a set of 48 anaesthesia case histories in which 42 anaesthesiologists independently rated the appropriateness of care on a nominal scale serve as an example.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters.
Fleiss, J. L. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031619 · Cited by 8,733
Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: Some generalizations and alternatives.
Light, R. J. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031643 · Cited by 747
Integration and generalization of kappas for multiple raters
Conger, A. J. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.88.2.322 · Cited by 545
Cited by
The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements
Sim, J., & Wright, C. C. (2005) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/85.3.257 · Cited by 4,093
Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics
Artstein, R., & Poesio, M. (2008) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli.07-034-r2 · Cited by 1,665
Beyond kappa: a review of interrater agreement measures
Banerjee, M., Capozzoli, M., McSweeney, L., & Sinha, D. (1999) · Canadian Journal of Statistics · doi:10.2307/3315487 · Cited by 976
Adverse Sedation Events in Pediatrics: Analysis of Medications Used for Sedation
Coté, C. J., Karl, H. W., Notterman, D. A., Weinberg, J. A., & McCloskey, C. (2000) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.106.4.633 · Cited by 616
Adverse Sedation Events in Pediatrics: A Critical Incident Analysis of Contributing Factors
Coté, C. J., Notterman, D. A., Karl, H. W., Weinberg, J. A., & McCloskey, C. (2000) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.105.4.805 · Cited by 593
Metadata
- Authors
- Posner, K. L., Sampson, P. D., Caplan, R. A., Ward, R. J., & Cheney, F. W.
- Venue
- Statistics in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1990-09
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1103-1115
- ISSN
- 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0258
- OpenAlex
- W2155816331
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measuring interrater reliability among multiple raters: An example of methods for nominal data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/sim.4780090917
- The paper
- Posner, K. L., Sampson, P. D., Caplan, R. A., Ward, R. J., & Cheney, F. W. (1990). Measuring interrater reliability among multiple raters: An example of methods for nominal data. Statistics in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780090917
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
