Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of Inter-Observer Reliability of Animal Welfare Indicators: Which Is the Best Index to Use?
Giammarino, Mauro; Mattiello, Silvana; Battini, Monica; Quatto, Piero; Battaglini, Luca Maria; Vieira, Ana C L; Stilwell, George; Renna, Manuela.
Afiliação
  • Giammarino M; Department of Prevention, Asl TO3, Veterinary Service, Area Animal Sanity, 10045 Piossasco, Italy.
  • Mattiello S; Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences-Production, Landscape, Agroenergy, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy.
  • Battini M; Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences-Production, Landscape, Agroenergy, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy.
  • Quatto P; Department of Economics, Management and Statistics, University of Milan-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy.
  • Battaglini LM; Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, 10095 Grugliasco, Italy.
  • Vieira ACL; Centre for Management Studies of Instituto Superior Técnico (CEG-IST), University of Lisbon, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal.
  • Stilwell G; Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Lisbon, 1300-477 Lisbon, Portugal.
  • Renna M; Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Turin, 10095 Grugliasco, Italy.
Animals (Basel) ; 11(5)2021 May 18.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34069942
ABSTRACT
This study focuses on the problem of assessing inter-observer reliability (IOR) in the case of dichotomous categorical animal-based welfare indicators and the presence of two observers. Based on observations obtained from Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) project surveys conducted on nine dairy goat farms, and using udder asymmetry as an indicator, we compared the performance of the most popular agreement indexes available in the literature Scott's π, Cohen's k, kPABAK, Holsti's H, Krippendorff's α, Hubert's Γ, Janson and Vegelius' J, Bangdiwala's B, Andrés and Marzo's ∆, and Gwet's γ(AC1). Confidence intervals were calculated using closed formulas of variance estimates for π, k, kPABAK, H, α, Γ, J, ∆, and γ(AC1), while the bootstrap and exact bootstrap methods were used for all the indexes. All the indexes and closed formulas of variance estimates were calculated using Microsoft Excel. The bootstrap method was performed with R software, while the exact bootstrap method was performed with SAS software. k, π, and α exhibited a paradoxical behavior, showing unacceptably low values even in the presence of very high concordance rates. B and γ(AC1) showed values very close to the concordance rate, independently of its value. Both bootstrap and exact bootstrap methods turned out to be simpler compared to the implementation of closed variance formulas and provided effective confidence intervals for all the considered indexes. The best approach for measuring IOR in these cases is the use of B or γ(AC1), with bootstrap or exact bootstrap methods for confidence interval calculation.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Animals (Basel) Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Animals (Basel) Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália