Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Stroke
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Published Online
on November 13, 2008

Stroke. 2008
Published online before print November 13, 2008, doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.526996
A more recent version of this article appeared on January 1, 2009
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
40/1/94    most recent
STROKEAHA.108.526996v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cordonnier, C.
Right arrow Articles by Al-Shahi Salman, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cordonnier, C.
Right arrow Articles by Al-Shahi Salman, R.
Related Collections
Right arrow CT and MRI
Right arrow Acute Stroke Syndromes
Right arrow Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Submitted on May 26, 2008
Accepted on June 10, 2008

Improving Interrater Agreement About Brain Microbleeds. Development of the Brain Observer MicroBleed Scale (BOMBS)

Charlotte Cordonnier PhD; Gillian M. Potter FRCR; Caroline A. Jackson MSc; Fergus Doubal MRCP; Sarah Keir MD; Cathie L.M. Sudlow DPhil; Joanna M. Wardlaw FMedSci; and Rustam Al-Shahi Salman PhD*

From Department of Neurology and Stroke Unit (C.C.), Lille University Hospital, France; Division of Clinical Neurosciences (C.C., G.M.P., C.A.J., F.D., S.K., C.L.M.S., J.M.W., R.A.S.S.), University of Edinburgh, UK.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: Rustam.Al-Shahi{at}ed.ac.uk.

Background and Purpose—If the diagnostic and prognostic significance of brain microbleeds (BMBs) are to be investigated and used for these purposes in clinical practice, observer variation in BMB assessment must be minimized.

Methods—Two doctors used a pilot rating scale to describe the number and distribution of BMBs (round, low-signal lesions, <10 mm diameter on gradient echo MRI) among 264 adults with stroke or TIA. They were blinded to clinical data and their counterpart's ratings. Disagreements were adjudicated by a third observer, who informed the development of a new Brain Observer MicroBleed Scale (BOMBS), which was tested in a separate cohort of 156 adults with stroke.

Results—In the pilot study, agreement about the presence of ≥1 BMB in any location was moderate ({kappa}=0.44; 95% CI, 0.32–0.56), but agreement was worse in lobar locations ({kappa}=0.44; 95% CI, 0.30–0.58) than in deep ({kappa}=0.62; 95% CI, 0.48–0.76) or posterior fossa locations ({kappa}=0.66; 95% CI, 0.47–0.84). Using BOMBS, agreement about the presence of ≥1 BMB improved in any location ({kappa}=0.68; 95% CI, 0.49–0.86) and in lobar locations ({kappa}=0.78; 95% CI, 0.60–0.97).

Conclusion—Interrater reliability concerning the presence of BMBs was moderate to good, and could be improved with the use of the BOMBS rating scale, which takes into account the main sources of interrater disagreement identified by our pilot scale.


Key words: brain microbleed • rating scale • interrater reliability • classification • stroke




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NeurologyHome page
S. M. Gregoire, U. J. Chaudhary, M. M. Brown, T. A. Yousry, C. Kallis, H. R. Jager, and D. J. Werring
The Microbleed Anatomical Rating Scale (MARS): Reliability of a tool to map brain microbleeds
Neurology, November 24, 2009; 73(21): 1759 - 1766.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]