Clinical Scores in Veterinary Medicine: What Are the Pitfalls of Score Construction, Reliability, and Validation? A General Methodological Approach Applied in Cattle.
cattle
clinical scores
methodological approach
Journal
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
Titre abrégé: Animals (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101635614
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Nov 2021
13 Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
27
09
2021
revised:
08
11
2021
accepted:
09
11
2021
entrez:
27
11
2021
pubmed:
28
11
2021
medline:
28
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Clinical scores are commonly used for cattle. They generally contain a mix of categorical and numerical variables that need to be assessed by scorers, such as farmers, animal caretakers, scientists, and veterinarians. This article examines the key concepts that need to be accounted for when developing the test for optimal outcomes. First, the target condition or construct that the scale is supposed to measure should be defined, and if possible, an adequate proxy used for classification should be determined. Then, items (e.g., clinical signs) of interest that are either caused by the target condition (reflective items) or that caused the target condition (formative items) are listed, and reliable items (inter and intra-rater reliability) are kept for the next step. A model is then developed to determine the relative weight of the items associated with the target condition. A scale is then built after validating the model and determining the optimal threshold in terms of sensitivity (ability to detect the target condition) and specificity (ability to detect the absence of the target condition). Its robustness to various scenarios of the target condition prevalence and the impact of the relative cost of false negatives to false positives can also be assessed to tailor the scale used based on specific application conditions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34827976
pii: ani11113244
doi: 10.3390/ani11113244
pmc: PMC8614512
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Références
J Immunol Methods. 1996 May 10;191(1):93-4
pubmed: 8642206
Prev Vet Med. 2005 May 10;68(2-4):145-63
pubmed: 15820113
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2020 Jul;36(2):399-423
pubmed: 32451033
Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2008 Mar;24(1):139-53
pubmed: 18299036
J Dairy Sci. 2014 Sep;97(9):5533-42
pubmed: 24996266
J Dairy Sci. 2019 Aug;102(8):7329-7344
pubmed: 31202651
Front Public Health. 2018 Jun 11;6:149
pubmed: 29942800
Animals (Basel). 2015 Aug 28;5(3):838-60
pubmed: 26479389
Int J Nurs Stud. 2011 Jun;48(6):661-71
pubmed: 21514934
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Aug 05;16:93
pubmed: 27495131
BMJ. 2013 Apr 12;346:f2125
pubmed: 23585065
PLoS One. 2021 May 14;16(5):e0251435
pubmed: 33989321
Stat Med. 2004 Apr 15;23(7):1095-109
pubmed: 15057880
Br J Surg. 2015 Feb;102(3):148-58
pubmed: 25627261
J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63
pubmed: 27330520
PeerJ. 2014 Nov 11;2:e651
pubmed: 25401054
Stat Med. 2016 Apr 30;35(9):1454-70
pubmed: 26555849
Psychol Methods. 2021 Nov 11;:
pubmed: 34766799
J Clin Epidemiol. 2002 Oct;55(10):1054-5
pubmed: 12464384
J Dairy Sci. 2017 Jul;100(7):5642-5652
pubmed: 28478006
Prev Vet Med. 2018 Aug 1;156:102-112
pubmed: 29891139
J Dairy Sci. 2018 Sep;101(9):8135-8145
pubmed: 30007809
Vaccine. 1999 Apr 23;17(17):2142-9
pubmed: 10367947
J Vet Intern Med. 2018 Sep;32(5):1787-1792
pubmed: 30133838
J Dairy Sci. 2017 Oct;100(10):8451-8454
pubmed: 28822548
Animal. 2021 Mar;15(3):100150
pubmed: 33573932
Res Vet Sci. 2012 Feb;92(1):121-3
pubmed: 21147490
J Dairy Sci. 2009 Dec;92(12):5769-801
pubmed: 19923585
J Dairy Sci. 2021 Nov;104(11):12053-12065
pubmed: 34454767
Proc Biol Sci. 2021 May 12;288(1950):20210190
pubmed: 33975474
PeerJ. 2014 Jan 02;2:e238
pubmed: 24482759
Vet Rec. 2019 Jul 27;185(4):109
pubmed: 31320546
Epidemiology. 2014 Mar;25(2):265-7
pubmed: 24487208
Sensors (Basel). 2020 Dec 25;21(1):
pubmed: 33375636