Reliability of pediatric Rome IV criteria for the diagnosis of disorders of gut–brain interaction

Author:

Ginton Lee1,Budhathoki Rasmita2,Saps Miguel2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Pediatrics, Miller School of Medicine University of Miami Miami Florida USA

2. Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, Miller School of Medicine University of Miami Miami Florida USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe diagnosis of disorders of gut–brain interaction (DGBI) in children is exclusively based on clinical criteria called the Rome criteria. The inter‐rater reliability (IRR) measures how well two raters agree with a diagnosis using the same diagnostic tool. Previous versions of the Rome criteria showed only fair to moderate IRR. There have been no studies assessing the IRR of the current edition of the pediatric Rome criteria (Rome IV). This study sought to investigate the IRR of the pediatric Rome IV criteria and compare its reliability with the previous versions of the Rome criteria. We hypothesized that changes made to Rome IV would result in higher IRR than previous versions.MethodsThis study used the same methodology as the previous studies on Rome II and III, including identical clinical vignettes, number of raters, and levels of expertise. Participants included 10 pediatric gastroenterology fellows and 10 pediatric gastroenterology specialists. IRR was assessed using the percentage of agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient to account for possible agreement by chance.ResultsThe average IRR percentage of agreement using the Rome IV criteria was 55% for pediatric gastroenterologists and 48.5% for fellows, indicating moderate agreement (k = 0.54 for specialists, k = 0.47 for fellows). The results demonstrated higher percentages of agreement and kappa coefficients compared to the Rome II and III criteria.ConclusionsThe findings demonstrate improved reliability in Rome IV compared to Rome II and III, suggesting that the changes incorporated into the Rome IV criteria have enhanced diagnostic consistency. Despite the advancements, the reliability is still moderate, indicating the need for further refinement of future versions of the Rome criteria.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3