Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Review

Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 3. Measures of observer variability (kappa statistic)

Thomas McGinn, Peter C. Wyer, Thomas B. Newman, Sheri Keitz, Rosanne Leipzig, Gordon Guyatt for and ; The Evidence-Based Medicine Teaching Tips Working Group
CMAJ November 23, 2004 171 (11) 1369-1373; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.1031981
Thomas McGinn
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter C. Wyer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thomas B. Newman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sheri Keitz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rosanne Leipzig
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gordon Guyatt for
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Tables

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Figure.

  • Figure2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Figure.

  • Figure3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Fig. 1: Two observers independently assess the presence or absence of a finding or outcome. Each observer determines that the finding is present in exactly 50% of the subjects. Their assessments agree in 75% of the cases. The yellow horizontal bar represents potential agreement (100%), and the turquoise bar represents actual agreement. The portion of each coloured bar that lies to the left of the dotted vertical line represents the agreement expected by chance (50%). The observed agreement above chance is half of the possible agreement above chance. The ratio of these 2 numbers is the kappa score.

  • Figure4
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Fig. 2: Agreement table for 2 hopeless clinicians who randomly guess whether Murphy's sign is present or absent in 100 patients with abdominal pain. Each clinician determines that half of the patients have a positive result. The numbers in each box reflect the number of patients in each agreement category.

  • Figure5
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Fig. 3: As in Fig. 2, the 2 clinicians again guess at random whether Murphy's sign is present or absent. However, each clinician now guesses that the sign is present in 60 of the 100 patients. Under these circumstances, of the 60 patients for whom clinician 1 guesses that the sign is present, clinician 2 guesses that it is present in 60%; 60% of 60 is 36 patients. Of the 60 patients for whom clinician 1 guesses that the sign is present, clinician 2 guesses that it is absent in 40%; 40% of 60 is 24 patients. Of the 40 patients for whom clinician 1 guesses that the sign is absent, clinician 2 guesses that it is present in 60%; 60% of 40 is 24 patients. Of the 40 patients for whom clinician 1 guesses that the sign is absent, clinician 2 guesses that it is absent in 40%; 40% of 40 is 16 patients.

  • Figure6
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint

    Fig. 4: Two clinicians who have been trained to assess Murphy's sign in patients with abdominal pain do an actual assessment on 100 patients. A: A 2 х 2 table reflecting actual agreement between the 2 clinicians. B: A 2 х 2 table illustrating the correct approach to determining the kappa score. The numbers in parentheses correspond to the results that would be expected were each clinician randomly guessing that half of the patients had a positive result (as in Fig. 2).

Tables

  • Figures
  • Table 2.

    Table1
  • Table 1.

    Table2
  • Table 3.

    Table3
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 171 (11)
CMAJ
Vol. 171, Issue 11
23 Nov 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 3. Measures of observer variability (kappa statistic)
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 3. Measures of observer variability (kappa statistic)
Thomas McGinn, Peter C. Wyer, Thomas B. Newman, Sheri Keitz, Rosanne Leipzig, Gordon Guyatt for
CMAJ Nov 2004, 171 (11) 1369-1373; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1031981

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 3. Measures of observer variability (kappa statistic)
Thomas McGinn, Peter C. Wyer, Thomas B. Newman, Sheri Keitz, Rosanne Leipzig, Gordon Guyatt for
CMAJ Nov 2004, 171 (11) 1369-1373; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1031981
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Clinician learners' objectives
    • Tip 1: Defining the importance of kappa
    • Tip 2: Calculating kappa
    • Tip 3: Calculating chance agreement
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Highlights of this issue
  • Tips for learning and teaching evidence-based medicine: introduction to the series
  • Correction
  • Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 4. Assessing heterogeneity of primary studies in systematic reviews and whether to combine their results
  • Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 1. Relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat
  • Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 2. Measures of precision (confidence intervals)
  • Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 5. The effect of spectrum of disease on the performance of diagnostic tests
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • A systematic review of medical and clinical research landscapes and quality in Malaysia and Indonesia [REALQUAMI]: the review protocol
  • Changes in medication administration error rates associated with the introduction of electronic medication systems in hospitals: a multisite controlled before and after study
  • An Interrater Reliability Study of Pulmonary Function Assessment With a Portable Spirometer
  • Updated meta-analysis on prevention of venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients
  • Comparison of informal caregiver and named nurse assessment of symptoms in elderly patients dying in hospital using the palliative outcome scale
  • Paediatric advance care planning survey: a cross-sectional examination of congruence and discordance between adolescents with HIV/AIDS and their families
  • Most elite athletes return to competition following operative management of meniscal tears: a systematic review
  • The use of antibiotic prophylaxis in hip arthroscopy is under-reported and lacks evidence-based guidelines: a systematic review and survey
  • Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of SGLT-2 inhibitors on microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: a review protocol
  • Effects of advanced life support versus basic life support on the mortality rates of patients with trauma in prehospital settings: a study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Effectiveness of a 'Do not interrupt bundled intervention to reduce interruptions during medication administration: a cluster randomised controlled feasibility study
  • A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials of social network interventions in type 2 diabetes
  • Surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement following slipped capital femoral epiphysis: A systematic review
  • Answering medical questions at the point of care: a cross-sectional study comparing rapid decisions based on PubMed and Epistemonikos searches with evidence-based recommendations developed with the GRADE approach
  • Prospective validation of a clinical decision rule to identify patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain who can safely be removed from cardiac monitoring
  • Athletic groin pain: a systematic review of surgical diagnoses, investigations and treatment
  • Safety and efficacy of tranexamic acid in bleeding paediatric trauma patients: a systematic review protocol
  • Return to Work and Sport Following High Tibial Osteotomy: A Systematic Review
  • Early evidence reports positive outcomes after osteochondral grafts and chondrocyte transplantation in the hip: a systematic review
  • Retractions in orthopaedic research: A systematic review
  • Use of heparins in patients with cancer: individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials study protocol
  • Childhood Cancer Mortality in India: Direct Estimates From a Nationally Representative Survey of Childhood Deaths
  • No difference in outcome between early versus delayed weight-bearing following microfracture surgery of the hip, knee or ankle: a systematic review of outcomes and complications
  • Expanding the scope of Critical Care Rapid Response Teams: a feasible approach to identify adverse events. A prospective observational cohort
  • Non-visible versus visible haematuria and bladder cancer risk: a study of electronic records in primary care
  • Computed tomography to assess risk of death in acute pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis
  • The Correlation Between Esophageal and Abdominal Pressures in Mechanically Ventilated Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery
  • Determining the frequency and preventability of adverse drug reaction-related admissions to an Irish University Hospital: a cross-sectional study
  • Periprocedural Heparin Bridging in Patients Receiving Vitamin K Antagonists: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bleeding and Thromboembolic Rates
  • Authors response
  • Errors in the administration of intravenous medications in hospital and the role of correct procedures and nurse experience
  • Bedside Screening for Fistula Stenosis Should Be Tailored to the Site of the Arteriovenous Anastomosis
  • In Search of an Optimal Bedside Screening Program for Arteriovenous Fistula Stenosis
  • Homocysteine in Vascular Behcet Disease: A Meta-Analysis
  • Visual Assessment of the Spine Bruckel Instrument, a Novel Status Tool to Reflect Appearance of the Spine in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis
  • JAK2V617F mutation for the early diagnosis of Ph- myeloproliferative neoplasms in patients with venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis
  • Relationship Between Preventability of Death After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery and All-Cause Risk-Adjusted Mortality Rates
  • Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Venous Thromboembolism: A Meta-Analysis
  • Accuracy of Physical Examination in the Detection of Arteriovenous Fistula Stenosis
  • Erythropoietin-receptor agonists in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
  • Discordance in Perceptions of Barriers to Diabetes Care Between Patients and Primary Care and Secondary Care
  • Thrombophilic abnormalities, oral contraceptives, and risk of cerebral vein thrombosis: a meta-analysis
  • Not Working 3 Years After Breast Cancer: Predictors in a Population-Based Study
  • Reliability of the Whiff Test in Clinical Practice
  • Teaching evidence-based practice on foot
  • Work absence after breast cancer diagnosis: a population-based study
  • Teaching evidence-based practice on foot
  • Kappa statistic
  • Kappa statistic
  • Kappa statistic
  • Kappa statistic
  • Editor's note
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Pharmacologic prevention of migraine
  • Diagnosis and acute management of migraine
  • Transient ischemic attack and minor stroke: diagnosis, risk stratification and management
Show more Review

Similar Articles

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire