Skip to main content
. 2010 May;27(5):843–852. doi: 10.1089/neu.2010.1293

Table 4a.

Comparison between the Alternative Eight-point GOSE Data Collection Method and the Conventional Structured Interviews: Agreement between a Central Reviewer and the Investigators on Rating Six Sample Case Transcripts

 
 
 
Investigator rating
 
GOSE collection method Transcript Expert VS SD− SD+ MD− MD+ GR− GR+ Agreement
Alternative system (n = 60) A SD−   10           100%
  B SD+     10         100%
  C MD−       10       100%
  D MD+         10     100%
  E MD+     1   9     90%
  F GR−         1 9   90%
Overall agreement 97% (weighted κ = 0.97 and 95% confidence interval 0.91, 1.00)
Alternative system without central monitoring (n = 66) A SD−   10 1         92%
  B SD+     11         100%
  C MD−     1 5 5     45%
  D MD+     2   9     82%
  E MD+     2   9     82%
  F GR−         4 6 1 55%
Overall agreement 76% (weighted κ = 0.79 and 95% confidence interval 0.69, 0.89)
Conventional structured interview (n = 66) A SD−   6 5         55%
  B SD+     9 2       82%
  C MD−     1 6 2 2   55%
  D MD+     1   7 3   64%
  E MD+     1 4 6     55%
  F GR−         2 7 2 64%

Overall agreement 63% (weighted κ = 0.70 and 95% confidence interval 0.60, 0.81).

GR, good recovery; MD, moderate disability; SD, severe disability; VS, vegetative status; GOSE, extended Glasgow Outcome Scale.