Comparing Interrater reliability between eye examination and eye self-examination

Authors

  • Maria Alzete de Lima Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte; Departamento de Enfermagem
  • Lorita Marlena Freitag Pagliuca Universidade Federa do Ceará; Departamento de Enfermagem
  • Jennara Cândido do Nascimento Centro Universitário Estácio do Ceará
  • Joselany Áfio Caetano Universidade Federa do Ceará; Departamento de Enfermagem

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.1232.2966

Keywords:

Nursing, Eye Health, Self-Examination, Educational Technology, Ophthalmology, Self Care.

Abstract

Objective: to compare Interrater reliability concerning two eye assessment methods. Method: quasi-experimental study conducted with 324 college students including eye self-examination and eye assessment performed by the researchers in a public university. Kappa coefficient was used to verify agreement. Results: reliability coefficients between Interraters ranged from 0.85 to 0.95, with statistical significance at 0.05. The exams to check for near acuity and peripheral vision presented a reasonable kappa >;0.2. The remaining coefficients were higher, ranging from very to totally reliable. Conclusion: comparatively, the results of both methods were similar. The virtual manual on eye self-examination can be used to screen for eye conditions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2017-01-01

Issue

Vol. 25 (2017)

Section

Original Articles

License

RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.
Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
 Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.

 

How to Cite

Comparing Interrater reliability between eye examination and eye self-examination. (2017). Revista Latino-Americana De Enfermagem, 25, e2966-. https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.1232.2966