Document Detail

Inter-rater reliability in child sexual abuse diagnosis among expert reviewers.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  23398966     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
OBJECTIVES: To determine how well experts agree when assessing child sexual abuse cases. METHODS: A total of twelve physician subjects were recruited and voluntarily enrolled from an existing peer review network. Experts from the network had been chosen for their experience in the field and their affiliation with children's advocacy centers. Each expert submitted three cases of prepubertal female genital examinations clearly demonstrable of the case findings. Submitted cases included demographics, history, physical and genital exam findings, photodocumentation, and diagnosis. Experts reviewed each submitted case and labeled the case negative for physical finding(s), positive for physical finding(s), or indeterminate. Cases were analyzed to determine the level of agreement. RESULTS: Thirty-six cases were submitted for use in this study; one case was excluded prior to starting the review process. After all experts completed their reviews the authors reviewed the cases and results. Two additional cases were excluded, one due to poor quality photodocumentation and one for not meeting the study criteria. Thirty-three cases were used for data analysis. All 12 expert reviewers agreed in 15 of the cases. Overall, in 22 of 33 (67%) cases at least 11 of the 12 reviewers agreed with the original diagnosis. Six of 33 (18%) cases had variable agreement (8-10 reviewers agreed with original diagnosis) among reviewers; 5 of 33 (15%) cases had poor or mixed agreement (7 or less reviewers agreed with original diagnosis). CONCLUSIONS: Experts exhibit consensus in cases where the findings clearly are normal and abnormal, but demonstrate much more variability in cases where the diagnostic decisions are less obvious. Most of the diagnostic variability is due to interpretation of the findings as normal, abnormal or indeterminate, not on the perception of the examination findings themselves. More research should be done to develop a national consensus on the accurate interpretation of anogenital examination findings. Photographic image quality plays an important role in this quality review process and universally needs to be improved.
Suzanne P Starling; Lori D Frasier; Kristi Jarvis; Anne McDonald
Related Documents :
23122016 - Fatal henoch-schonlein purpura in an adult related to bowel perforation: report and rev...
22770786 - Streptococcus agalactiae endocarditis.
23119216 - The first report of an intraperitoneal free-floating mass (an autoamputated ovary) caus...
24570106 - The mortality peer review panel: a report on the deaths on operations of uk service per...
7900376 - Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans. a 10-year clinicopathological review of an uncommon tu...
22052796 - A de novo 3.54 mb deletion of 17q22-q23.1 associated with hydrocephalus: a case report ...
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2013-2-8
Journal Detail:
Title:  Child abuse & neglect     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1873-7757     ISO Abbreviation:  Child Abuse Negl     Publication Date:  2013 Feb 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2013-2-12     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7801702     Medline TA:  Child Abuse Negl     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Copyright Information:
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Eastern Virginia Medical School, Children's Hospital of The King's Daughters Child Abuse Program, 935 Redgate Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23507, USA.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Revisiting the white blood cell count: immature granulocytes count as a diagnostic marker to discrim...
Next Document:  CP7_E2alf oral vaccination confers partial protection against early classical swine fever virus chal...