首页> 外文OA文献 >Application of mixed effects limits of agreement in the presence of multiple sources of variability: exemplar from the comparison of several devices to measure respiratory rate in COPD patients
【2h】

Application of mixed effects limits of agreement in the presence of multiple sources of variability: exemplar from the comparison of several devices to measure respiratory rate in COPD patients

机译:在存在多种变异源的情况下应用混合效应协议限制:通过比较几种设备来测量COPD患者的呼吸频率

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

IntroductionThe Bland-Altman limits of agreement method is widely used to assess how well the measurements produced by two raters, devices or systems agree with each other. However, mixed effects versions of the method which take into account multiple sources of variability are less well described in the literature. We address the practical challenges of applying mixed effects limits of agreement to the comparison of several devices to measure respiratory rate in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). MethodsRespiratory rate was measured in 21 people with a range of severity of COPD. Participants were asked to perform eleven different activities representative of daily life during a laboratory-based standardised protocol of 57 minutes. A mixed effects limits of agreement method was used to assess the agreement of five commercially available monitors (Camera, Photoplethysmography (PPG), Impedance, Accelerometer, and Chest-band) with the current gold standard device for measuring respiratory rate. ResultsResults produced using mixed effects limits of agreement were compared to results from a fixed effects method based on analysis of variance (ANOVA) and were found to be similar. The Accelerometer and Chest-band devices produced the narrowest limits of agreement (-8.63 to 4.27 and -9.99 to 6.80 respectively) with mean bias -2.18 and -1.60 breaths per minute. These devices also had the lowest within-participant and overall standard deviations (3.23 and 3.29 for Accelerometer and 4.17 and 4.28 for Chest-band respectively). ConclusionsThe mixed effects limits of agreement analysis enabled us to answer the question of which devices showed the strongest agreement with the gold standard device with respect to measuring respiratory rates. In particular, the estimated within-participant and overall standard deviations of the differences, which are easily obtainable from the mixed effects model results, gave a clear indication that the Accelerometer and Chest-band devices performed best.
机译:简介Bland-Altman协议限制方法被广泛用于评估两个评估者,设备或系统产生的测量结果相互之间的一致性。但是,考虑到多种可变性来源的方法的混合效果版本在文献中描述得不太好。我们解决了将协议的混合效应限制应用于比较几种用于测量慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者呼吸频率的设备的实际挑战。方法对21例COPD严重程度不同的人群进行呼吸频率测定。在基于实验室的57分钟标准化协议中,要求参与者进行11项代表日常生活的不同活动。使用混合效果限制协议方法评估五种市售监护仪(相机,光电描记器(PPG),阻抗,加速度计和胸带)与当前用于测量呼吸频率的金标准设备之间的一致性。结果将使用协议的混合效应限制产生的结果与基于方差分析(ANOVA)的固定效应方法的结果进行比较,发现相似。加速度计和胸带式设备产生了最窄的一致性限制(分别为-8.63至4.27和-9.99至6.80),平均偏差为每分钟呼吸-2.18和-1.60。这些设备的参加者和整体标准偏差也最低(加速度计分别为3.23和3.29,胸带分别为4.17和4.28)。结论一致性分析的混合影响极限使我们能够回答以下问题:在测量呼吸频率方面,哪些设备与金标准设备显示出最强的一致性。尤其是,可以从混合效应模型结果中轻松获得估计的参与者内部差异和总体标准偏差,这清楚地表明了加速度计和胸带装置的效果最佳。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号