The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Statistical methods for conducting agreement (comparison of clinical tests) and precision (repeatability or reproducibility) studies in optometry and ophthalmology
Open accessAbstract
Citation information : McAlinden C, Khadka J & Pesudovs K. Statistical methods for conducting agreement (comparison of clinical tests) and precision (repeatability or reproducibility) studies in optometry and ophthalmology. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2011, 31 , 330–338. doi: 10.1111/j.1475‐1313.2011.00851.x The ever‐expanding choice of ocular metrology and imaging equipment has driven research into the validity of their measurements. Consequently, studies of the agreement between two instruments or clinical tests have proliferated in the ophthalmic literature. It is important that researchers apply the appropriate statistical tests in agreement studies. Correlation coefficients are hazardous and should be avoided. The ‘limits of agreement’ method originally proposed by Altman and Bland in 1983 is the statistical procedure of choice. Its step‐by‐step use and practical considerations in relation to optometry and ophthalmology are detailed in addition to sample size considerations and statistical approaches to precision (repeatability or reproducibility) estimates.
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.
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This was consistent with recommendations from McAlinden et al that sample sizes for agreement studies should include at least 100 subjects(McAlinden et al., 2011).”
From Acceptability and Concordance of Self- Versus Clinician- Sampling for HPV Testing among Rural South Indian Women (2021) · cites this paper as McAlinden et al., 2011
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
A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales
Cohen, J. (1960) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316446002000104 · Cited by 42,398
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
Measuring agreement in method comparison studies
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800204 · Cited by 9,619
A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.
Lin, L. I.-K. (1989) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532051 · Cited by 8,785
Scheffé, H. (1960) · Soil Science · doi:10.1097/00010694-196006000-00016 · Cited by 5,625
Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies
Altman, D. G., & Bland, J. M. (1983) · The Statistician · doi:10.2307/2987937 · Cited by 4,300
Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry
Schwab, J. J. (1968) · Psychosomatics · doi:10.1016/s0033-3182(68)71813-2 · Cited by 1,291
Measurement reliability and agreement in psychiatry
Shrout, P. E. (1998) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029800700306 · Cited by 1,211
Clinical biostatistics: LIV. The biostatistics of concordance
Kramer, M. S., & Feinstein, A. R. (1981) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1038/clpt.1981.18 · Cited by 1,087
Improving the Reliability of the Pelli-Robson Contrast Sensitivity Test
Bullimore, M. A., Elliott, D. B., & Bailey, I. L. (1991) · Noninvasive Assessment of the Visual System · doi:10.1364/navs.1991.md12 · Cited by 257
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Statistical guidelines for the analysis of data obtained from one or both eyes
Armstrong, R. A. (2012) · Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics · doi:10.1111/opo.12009 · Cited by 538
Goligher, E. C., Laghi, F. A., Detsky, M. E., Farias, P., Murray, A., Brace, D., Brochard, L. J., Sebastien-Bolz, S., Rubenfeld, G. D., Kavanagh, B. P., et al. (2015) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-015-3687-3 · Cited by 451
Goligher, E. C., Laghi, F., Detsky, M. E., Farias, P., Murray, A., Brace, D., Brochard, L. J., Bolz, S.-S., Rubenfeld, G. D., Kavanagh, B. P., et al. (2015) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-015-3724-2 · Cited by 315
Sample Size for Assessing Agreement between Two Methods of Measurement by Bland−Altman Method
Lu, M., Zhong, W.-H., Liu, Y., Miao, H., Li, Y., & Ji, M. (2016) · The International Journal of Biostatistics · doi:10.1515/ijb-2015-0039 · Cited by 307
Comparison of subjective grading and objective assessment in meibography
Pult, H., & Riede-Pult, B. H. (2012) · Contact Lens and Anterior Eye · doi:10.1016/j.clae.2012.10.074 · Cited by 277
Metadata
- Authors
- McAlinden, C., Khadka, J., & Pesudovs, K.
- Affiliations
- Flinders University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- McAlinden, Colm
- Venue
- Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics
- Published
- 2011-05-26
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 330-338
- ISSN
- 0275-5408 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-1313
- OpenAlex
- W2126376404
- Cited by
- 436
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 5.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
- Keywords
- repeatability, reproducibility, limits of agreement, correlation coefficient, ophthalmic instruments, sample size, measurement precision, optometry
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Ophthalmology, Optometry, Vision, Ocular, Reproducibility of Results, Qualitative Research
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
