Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: We previously developed a reliable and valid method for classifying the intensity of pediatric cancer treatment. The Intensity of Treatment Rating Scale (ITR-2.0) 1 classifies treatments into four operationally defined levels of intensity and is completed by pediatric oncology specialists based on diagnosis, stage, and treatment data from the medical record. Experience with the ITR-2.0 and recent changes in treatment protocols indicated the need for a minor revision and revalidation. METHODS: Five criterion raters reviewed the prior items, independently proposing additions and/or changes in the classification of diseases/treatments. Subsequent to a group discussion of the proposed changes, a revised 43-item ITR was evaluated. Pediatric oncologists (n = 47) completed a two-part online questionnaire. Validity of the classifications was determined by the oncologists classifying each disease/treatment into one of the four levels of intensity. Inter-rater reliability was calculated by having each oncologist classify the treatments of 12 sample patients using the new version which we call the ITR-3. RESULTS: Agreement between median ratings of the 43 items for the pediatric oncologists and the criterion raters was high (r = 0.88). The median of the raters was either identical (81%) with the criterion ratings or discrepant by one level. Inter-rater reliability was very high when using the ITR-3 to classify 12 sample patients, with a median agreement of 0.90 and an intraclass correlation coefficient (r(ICC) = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: With these minor modifications and updates, the ITR-3 remains a reliable and valid method for classifying pediatric oncology treatment protocols.
Kazak et al. (Fri,) studied this question.