Cargando…

Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach?

Scoring reflex responsiveness and injury of aquatic organisms has gained popularity as predictors of discard survival. Given this method relies upon the individual interpretation of scoring criteria, an evaluation of its robustness is done here to test whether protocol-instructed, multiple raters wi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meeremans, Pieter, Yochum, Noëlle, Kochzius, Marc, Ampe, Bart, Tuyttens, Frank A. M., Uhlmann, Sven Sebastian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5509118/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28704390
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179092
_version_ 1783249967560785920
author Meeremans, Pieter
Yochum, Noëlle
Kochzius, Marc
Ampe, Bart
Tuyttens, Frank A. M.
Uhlmann, Sven Sebastian
author_facet Meeremans, Pieter
Yochum, Noëlle
Kochzius, Marc
Ampe, Bart
Tuyttens, Frank A. M.
Uhlmann, Sven Sebastian
author_sort Meeremans, Pieter
collection PubMed
description Scoring reflex responsiveness and injury of aquatic organisms has gained popularity as predictors of discard survival. Given this method relies upon the individual interpretation of scoring criteria, an evaluation of its robustness is done here to test whether protocol-instructed, multiple raters with diverse backgrounds (research scientist, technician, and student) are able to produce similar or the same reflex and injury score for one of the same flatfish (European plaice, Pleuronectes platessa) after experiencing commercial fishing stressors. Inter-rater reliability for three raters was assessed by using a 3-point categorical scale (‘absent’, ‘weak’, ‘strong’) and a tagged visual analogue continuous scale (tVAS, a 10 cm bar split in three labelled sections: 0 for ‘absent’, ‘weak’, ‘moderate’, and ‘strong’) for six reflex responses, and a 4-point scale for four injury types. Plaice (n = 304) were sampled from 17 research beam-trawl deployments during four trips. Fleiss kappa (categorical scores) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC, continuous scores) indicated variable inter-rater agreement by reflex type (ranging between 0.55 and 0.88, and 67% and 91% for Fleiss kappa and ICC, respectively), with least agreement among raters on extent of injury (Fleiss kappa between 0.08 and 0.27). Despite differences among raters, which did not significantly influence the relationship between impairment and predicted survival, combining categorical reflex and injury scores always produced a close relationship of such vitality indices and observed delayed mortality. The use of the continuous scale did not improve fit of these models compared with using the reflex impairment index based on categorical scores. Given these findings, we recommend using a 3-point categorical over a continuous scale. We also determined that training rather than experience of raters minimised inter-rater differences. Our results suggest that cost-efficient reflex impairment and injury scoring may be considered a robust technique to evaluate lethal stress and damage of this flatfish species on-board commercial beam-trawl vessels.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5509118
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55091182017-08-07 Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach? Meeremans, Pieter Yochum, Noëlle Kochzius, Marc Ampe, Bart Tuyttens, Frank A. M. Uhlmann, Sven Sebastian PLoS One Research Article Scoring reflex responsiveness and injury of aquatic organisms has gained popularity as predictors of discard survival. Given this method relies upon the individual interpretation of scoring criteria, an evaluation of its robustness is done here to test whether protocol-instructed, multiple raters with diverse backgrounds (research scientist, technician, and student) are able to produce similar or the same reflex and injury score for one of the same flatfish (European plaice, Pleuronectes platessa) after experiencing commercial fishing stressors. Inter-rater reliability for three raters was assessed by using a 3-point categorical scale (‘absent’, ‘weak’, ‘strong’) and a tagged visual analogue continuous scale (tVAS, a 10 cm bar split in three labelled sections: 0 for ‘absent’, ‘weak’, ‘moderate’, and ‘strong’) for six reflex responses, and a 4-point scale for four injury types. Plaice (n = 304) were sampled from 17 research beam-trawl deployments during four trips. Fleiss kappa (categorical scores) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC, continuous scores) indicated variable inter-rater agreement by reflex type (ranging between 0.55 and 0.88, and 67% and 91% for Fleiss kappa and ICC, respectively), with least agreement among raters on extent of injury (Fleiss kappa between 0.08 and 0.27). Despite differences among raters, which did not significantly influence the relationship between impairment and predicted survival, combining categorical reflex and injury scores always produced a close relationship of such vitality indices and observed delayed mortality. The use of the continuous scale did not improve fit of these models compared with using the reflex impairment index based on categorical scores. Given these findings, we recommend using a 3-point categorical over a continuous scale. We also determined that training rather than experience of raters minimised inter-rater differences. Our results suggest that cost-efficient reflex impairment and injury scoring may be considered a robust technique to evaluate lethal stress and damage of this flatfish species on-board commercial beam-trawl vessels. Public Library of Science 2017-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5509118/ /pubmed/28704390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179092 Text en © 2017 Meeremans et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Meeremans, Pieter
Yochum, Noëlle
Kochzius, Marc
Ampe, Bart
Tuyttens, Frank A. M.
Uhlmann, Sven Sebastian
Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach?
title Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach?
title_full Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach?
title_fullStr Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach?
title_full_unstemmed Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach?
title_short Inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: Does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (RAMP) approach?
title_sort inter-rater reliability of categorical versus continuous scoring of fish vitality: does it affect the utility of the reflex action mortality predictor (ramp) approach?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5509118/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28704390
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179092
work_keys_str_mv AT meeremanspieter interraterreliabilityofcategoricalversuscontinuousscoringoffishvitalitydoesitaffecttheutilityofthereflexactionmortalitypredictorrampapproach
AT yochumnoelle interraterreliabilityofcategoricalversuscontinuousscoringoffishvitalitydoesitaffecttheutilityofthereflexactionmortalitypredictorrampapproach
AT kochziusmarc interraterreliabilityofcategoricalversuscontinuousscoringoffishvitalitydoesitaffecttheutilityofthereflexactionmortalitypredictorrampapproach
AT ampebart interraterreliabilityofcategoricalversuscontinuousscoringoffishvitalitydoesitaffecttheutilityofthereflexactionmortalitypredictorrampapproach
AT tuyttensfrankam interraterreliabilityofcategoricalversuscontinuousscoringoffishvitalitydoesitaffecttheutilityofthereflexactionmortalitypredictorrampapproach
AT uhlmannsvensebastian interraterreliabilityofcategoricalversuscontinuousscoringoffishvitalitydoesitaffecttheutilityofthereflexactionmortalitypredictorrampapproach