This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 40/1/94    most recent STROKEAHA.108.526996v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cordonnier, C. Articles by Salman, R. A.-S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cordonnier, C. Articles by Salman, R. A.-S. Related Collections CT and MRI Acute Stroke Syndromes Intracerebral Hemorrhage

(Stroke. 2009;40:94.)
© 2009 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Contributions

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 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.

Correspondence to Rustam Al-Shahi Salman, Bramwell Dott Building, Division of Clinical Neurosciences, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK. 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 (=0.44; 95% CI, 0.32–0.56), but agreement was worse in lobar locations (=0.44; 95% CI, 0.30–0.58) than in deep (=0.62; 95% CI, 0.48–0.76) or posterior fossa locations (=0.66; 95% CI, 0.47–0.84). Using BOMBS, agreement about the presence of 1 BMB improved in any location (=0.68; 95% CI, 0.49–0.86) and in lobar locations (=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