Crowdsourcing Morphology Assessments in Oculoplastic Surgery: Reliability and Validity of Lay People Relative to Professional Image Analysts and Experts.
Journal
Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery
ISSN: 1537-2677
Titre abrégé: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8508431
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
pubmed:
4
12
2019
medline:
19
3
2021
entrez:
3
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To determine if crowdsourced ratings of oculoplastic surgical outcomes provide reliable information compared to professional graders and oculoplastic experts. In this prospective psychometric evaluation, a scale for the rating of postoperative eyelid swelling was constructed using randomly selected images and topic experts. This scale was presented adjacent to 205 test images, including 10% duplicates. Graders were instructed to match the test image to the reference image it most closely resembles. Three sets of graders were solicited: crowdsourced lay people from Amazon Mechanical Turk marketplace, professional graders from the Doheny Image Reading Center (DIRC), and American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery surgeons. Performance was assessed by classical correlational analysis and generalizability theory. The correlation between scores on the first rating and the second rating for the 19 repeated occurrences was 0.60 for lay observers, 0.80 for DIRC graders and 0.84 for oculoplastic experts. In terms of inter-group rating reliability for all photos, the scores provided by lay observers were correlated with DIRC graders at a level of r = 0.88 and to experts at r = 0.79. The pictures themselves accounted for the greatest amount of variation among all groups. The amount of variation in the scores due to the rater was highest in the lay group at 25%, and was 20% and 21% for DIRC graders and experts, respectively. Crowdsourced observers are insufficiently precise to replicate the results of experts in grading postoperative eyelid swelling. DIRC graders performed similarly to experts and present a less resource-intensive option.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31789786
doi: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000001515
pii: 00002341-202003000-00014
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
178-181Références
Starck WJ, Griffin JE Jr, Epker BN. Objective evaluation of the eyelids and eyebrows after blepharoplasty. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996;54:297–302; discussion 302–3.
Jacobsen AG, Brost B, Vorum H, et al. Functional benefits and patient satisfaction with upper blepharoplasty - evaluated by objective and subjective outcome measures. Acta Ophthalmol 2017;95:820–5.
Raschke GF, Bader RD, Rieger UM, et al. Photo-assisted analysis of blepharoplasty results. Ann Plast Surg 2011;66:328–33.
Netscher DT, Patrinely JR, Peltier M, et al. Transconjunctival versus transcutaneous lower eyelid blepharoplasty: a prospective study. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995;96:1053–60.
Ching S, Thoma A, McCabe RE, et al. Measuring outcomes in aesthetic surgery: a comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;111:469–80; discussion 481–2.
Park KS, Park DD. Objective outcome measurement after upper blepharoplasty: an analysis of different operative techniques. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2017;41:64–72.
Wang X, Mudie L, Brady CJ. Crowdsourcing: an overview and applications to ophthalmology. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2016;27:256–61.
Wang X, Mudie LI, Baskaran M, et al. Crowdsourcing to evaluate fundus photographs for the presence of glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2017;26:505–10.
Mitry D, Peto T, Hayat S, et al. Crowdsourcing as a novel technique for retinal fundus photography classification: analysis of images in the EPIC Norfolk cohort on behalf of the UK Biobank Eye and Vision Consortium. PLoS One 2013;8:e71154.
Shavelson RJ, Webb NM. Generalizability Theory: A Primer. 1991.Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Clayton MJ. Delphi: a technique to harness expert opinion for critical decision-making tasks in education. Educational Psychology 1997;17:373–86.