ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To develop and test a computer program to assist researchers in assigning scores in the application of the Basso, Beattie and Bresnahan (BBB) scale and to compare these scores when doing so in free, targeted and automated computer-assisted modes. METHOD: To test the program, the participants used the Impactor methodology recommended by the New York University (USA), in which 12 Wistar rats submitted to spinal cord injury were filmed on the 28th day after the injury. Eight researchers from the Laboratory of Medical Investigation, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, SP, Brazil took part in the study. The two heads of the laboratory, with 15 years of experience in the application of the scale, were considered the gold standard. RESULTS: The results of the scale application were not significantly different in relation to the gold standard, considering the mean of the evaluators in each method: free, targeted and automated form (with the help of the computer). CONCLUSIONS: The application of the BBB scale in the automated mode, using the computer program, did not present any difference in relation to the gold standard for all the evaluators. Level of Evidence II, Diagnostic Studies. .
Subject(s)
Animals , Rats , Spinal Cord Compression , Spinal Cord Injuries , Spinal Injuries , Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted/methods , Rats, WistarABSTRACT
Para avaliar a precisão da análise segmentar em eletrocardiografia pediátrica por cardiologistas, três diferentes métodos foram confrontados. No primeiro, avaliação livre, a normalidade segmentar é questionada e o entrevistado tem liberdade para aferição métrica, caso necessário. No segundo, avaliação dirigida, a mesma pergunta é formulada, porém com a imposição de uma aferição prévia do segmento No terceiro, avaliação automatizada, apenas a aferição é solicitada e submetida a um software de interpretação segmentar para ECG pediátrico com uma tabela de normalidade. As respostas foram comparadas às análises de dois cardiologistas (controle). O viés interpretativo foi significativamente menor na avaliação automatizada e a aferição precedente não modificou as interpretações não automatizadas...
To establish the precision of segmental analyses in pediatric electrocardiography by cardiologists, three different methods were confronted. In the first one, free assessment, the segment normality is questioned and the practitioner is allowed to quantitatively check the ECG, if needed. In the second, guided assessment, the same question is formulated, but the preliminary inspection of the segment is mandatory. In the third, automated assessment, only the inspection is requested and submitted to segmental interpretation software for pediatric ECG with an embedded table of normality. All answers were compared to the analysis of two cardiologists (control). Interpretative bias was significantly lower in the automated assessment and preceding inspection has not modified the non automated interpretations...