Key result
The overall interobserver agreement of the Minnesota code for ECG abnormalities in people with type 2 diabetes was good to excellent, ranging from 0.79 for ischemic abnormalities to 0.96 for atrial fibrillation.
Why the study?
The interobserver agreement in categories of ECG abnormalities using the Minnesota Code criteria in people with type 2 diabetes needed to be assessed.
What is the interobserver agreement of ECG abnormalities using Minnesota codes in people with type 2 diabetes?
Cross-Sectional (n=180)
Blinded to clinical information and other raters' results
No
What is the interobserver agreement of ECG abnormalities using Minnesota codes in people with type 2 diabetes?
The Minnesota code classification for ECG abnormalities demonstrates good to excellent overall interobserver agreement among raters evaluating patients with type 2 diabetes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports reliable Minnesota coding of ECGs in type 2 diabetes; leaves open generalizability and outcome impact.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the interobserver agreement in categories of electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities using the Minnesota Code criteria. METHODS: We used a random sample of 180 ECGs from people with type 2 diabetes. ECG abnormalities were classified and coded using the Minnesota ECG Classification. Each ECG was independently rated on several abnormalities by an experienced rater (rater 1) and by two cardiologists (raters 2 and 3) trained to apply the Minnesota codes on four Minnesota codes; 1-codes as an indication for myocardial infarction, 4 en 5-codes as an indication for ischemic abnormalities, 3-codes as an indication for left ventricle hypertrophy, 7-1-codes as an indication for ventricular conduction abnormalities, and 8-3-codes as an indication for atrial fibrillation / atrial flutter. After all pairwise tables were summed, the overall agreement, the specific positive and negative agreement were calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for each abnormality. Also, Kappa's with a 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: The overall agreement (with 95% CI) were for myocardial infarction, ischemic abnormalities, left ventricle hypertrophy, conduction abnormalities and atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter respectively: 0.87 (0.84-0.91), 0.79 (0.74-0.84), 0.81 (0.76-0.85), 0.93 (0.90-0.95), 0.96 (0.93-0.97). CONCLUSION: This study shows that the overall agreement of the Minnesota code is good to excellent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nijpels et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional in Type 2 diabetes (n=180). Minnesota ECG Classification vs. Between-rater comparison (3 raters) was evaluated on Overall agreement for myocardial infarction using Minnesota codes (Overall agreement 0.87, 95% CI 0.84-0.91). The overall interobserver agreement of the Minnesota code for ECG abnormalities in people with type 2 diabetes was good to excellent, ranging from 0.79 for ischemic abnormalities to 0.96 for atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: