Cited by 103Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchReliability and Agreement in Measurement

Interobserver variation in the assessment of pelvic organ prolapse.

Kobak, W. H., Rosenberger, K., Walters, M. D.·1996·International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the interobserver agreement of two grading systems for pelvic organ prolapse: the vaginal profile and the International Continence Society (ICS) draft proposal. Forty-nine consecutive women referred for evaluation of urinary incontinence and/or pelvic organ prolapse were studied. Patients were first examined by a physician and a nurse clinician using the vaginal profile, followed by an examination according to the technique described in the ICS draft proposal for standardization of terminology (1994). kappa statistic and Pearson's correlation coefficient were used to determine interobserver variability for the ICS system by overall stage, by stage-specific comparison, and by specific anatomic location. The vaginal profile was evaluated by obtaining a kappa for overall degree of prolapse, stage-specific comparison and by anatomic area. The kappa for the ICS stage was 0.79 (P < 0.001), and the kappa for the vaginal profile by area of greatest prolapse was 0.68 (P < 0.001), indicating substantial interobserver agreement for both systems. The ICS system was noted to have substantial interobserver agreement by a stage-specific comparison. All anatomic locations of the ICS staging system were found to correlate significantly, and a high degree of interobserver precision was found. The vaginal profile also showed significant interobserver agreement by overall degree of prolapse, by specific degree of prolapse, and by anatomic area. It was concluded that both the proposed ICS staging system and the traditional vaginal profile show significant interobserver agreement both by overall stage, stage-specific analysis and specific location. The registered nurse examination correlated well with the physician examination, indicating that the most important factor in obtaining reproducible results may be definition and close attention to examination technique.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf01894199

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The smallest discernable difference in POPQ measurements is 1.0 cm for the apex (point C) and 0.5 cm for other measurements.

    “A noninferiority threshold of a 1-cm difference was chosen because the investigative team felt this to be a clinically relevant change, and prior research has shown that the smallest discernable difference in POPQ measurements is 1.0 cm for the apex (point C) and 0.5 cm for other measurements.24”
  • Point estimates of SLmax favored the expedited group, and we would still have demonstrated noninferiority had we chosen a margin of 0.5 cm, the smallest discernable difference in POPQ measurement.

    “Of note, point estimates of SLmax favored the expedited group, and we would still have demonstrated noninferiority had we chosen a margin of 0.5 cm, the smallest discernable difference in POPQ measurement.24”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kobak, W. H., Rosenberger, K., & Walters, M. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
Venue
International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
Published
1996-05
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
121-124
ISSN
  • 0937-3462 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-3023
OpenAlex
W1984988372
Cited by
103
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 11 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Urogynecology Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
pelvic organ prolapse, interobserver agreement, prolapse staging, urinary incontinence
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Methods, Uterine Prolapse, Observer Variation

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