Interobserver reproducibility of The Paris System of Reporting Urine Cytology on cytocentrifuged samples

Background The Paris System of Reporting Urine Cytology aims to screen samples for HGUC and to provide a universally acceptable reporting format for urine cytology specimens. However, studies detailing the reproducibility of this system, especially on cyto‐centrifuge preparations, are lacking. Metho...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diagnostic cytopathology 2020-11, Vol.48 (11), p.979-985
Hauptverfasser: Sahai, Rishabh, Rajkumar, Bindu, Joshi, Prashant, Singh, Ashok, Kumar, Arvind, Durgapal, Prashant, Gupta, Arvind, Kishore, Sanjeev, Chowdhury, Nilotpal
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background The Paris System of Reporting Urine Cytology aims to screen samples for HGUC and to provide a universally acceptable reporting format for urine cytology specimens. However, studies detailing the reproducibility of this system, especially on cyto‐centrifuge preparations, are lacking. Methods 149 voided urine samples received in Department of Pathology were reviewed independently by five cytopathologists. To estimate the overall agreement, Gwet's AC and AC1statistics between each pair of raters were used. To measure the random error component, polychoric correlations were used. To assess the systematic error, Friedman test was used. Results There was moderately good inter‐rater agreement between the raters. Gwets AC2 ranged between 0.67 and 0.89 for the classification of the cases once the sample was found adequate for assessment, while the Gwet's AC1 ranged between 0.61 and 0.94 in assessing for adequacy. There were significant systematic differences between raters in their thresholds for the different categories as well as in differentiating between an adequate and inadequate sample (P value by Friedman test
ISSN:8755-1039
1097-0339
DOI:10.1002/dc.24476