2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2009.12.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reliability of Visual Assessment of Global and Segmental Left Ventricular Function: A Multicenter Study by the Israeli Echocardiography Research Group

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
36
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
2
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, MRI showed significant interobserver variability despite high intraclass correlation, which may be related to the large degree of manual interaction and may be overcome with additional consented training, as reported by Beerbaum et al (47). For 2D Echo, our results agree well with the studies of Blondheim et al (48) and Hoffman et al (49), which also showed good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ϭ 0.78 and 0.79, respectively, vs. 0.86 for this study) for EF. In contrast, for CVG, Hoffman et al (49) reported higher reliability regarding EF (intraclass correlation coefficient ϭ 0.80 vs. 0.58 for this study).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Interestingly, MRI showed significant interobserver variability despite high intraclass correlation, which may be related to the large degree of manual interaction and may be overcome with additional consented training, as reported by Beerbaum et al (47). For 2D Echo, our results agree well with the studies of Blondheim et al (48) and Hoffman et al (49), which also showed good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ϭ 0.78 and 0.79, respectively, vs. 0.86 for this study) for EF. In contrast, for CVG, Hoffman et al (49) reported higher reliability regarding EF (intraclass correlation coefficient ϭ 0.80 vs. 0.58 for this study).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Instead, worldwide availability of echocardiography is surely greater. Furthermore, several recent studies have shown the excellent interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility of echocardiographic evaluation on LVEF [15,16]. This has been evaluated as similar to that of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), even in patients with TM [17].…”
mentioning
confidence: 94%
“…9 This takes considerable skill gained by experience as outlined by American Society of Echocardiography criteria. 10 Advances in echo technology (eg, incorporation of second harmonics) have enhanced endocardial visualization; however, the classification of WM by visual assessment is highly observer-dependent 11 and is probably the only area of echocardiography that remains totally qualitative. Despite efforts to develop automated systems for detection and quantification of WM abnormalities, which would make this evaluation more objective and consistent, none has yet been able to replace the expert reader.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%