Moderate versus Mediocre: The Reliability of Spine MR Data Interpretations

Free first page


  • 1 Carrino JA, Lurie JD, Tosteson ANA, et al. Lumbar spine: reliability of MR imaging findings. Radiology 249;3:161–170. Google Scholar
  • 2 Fardon DF, Milette PC; and Combined Task Forces of the North American Spine Society, American Society of Spine Radiology, and American Society of Neuroradiology. Nomenclature and classification of lumbar disc pathology: recommendations of the Combined Task Forces of the North American Spine Society, American Society of Spine Radiology, and American Society of Neuroradiology. Spine 2001;26:E93–E113. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mulconrey DS, Knight RQ, Bramble JD, Paknikar S, Harty PA. Interobserver reliability in the interpretation of diagnostic lumbar MRI and nuclear imaging. Spine J 2006;6:177–184. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jones A, Clarke A, Freeman BJ, Lam KS, Grevitt MP. The Modic classification: inter- and intraobserver error in clinical practice. Spine 2005;30:1867–1869. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Peterson CK, Gatterman B, Carter JC, Humphreys BK, Weibel A. Inter- and intraexaminer reliability in identifying and classifying degenerative marrow (Modic) changes on lumbar spine magnetic resonance scans. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2007;30:85–90. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Smith BM, Hurwitz EL, Solsberg D, et al. Interobserver reliability of detecting lumbar intervertebral disc high-intensity zone on magnetic resonance imaging and association of high-intensity zone with pain and anular disruption. Spine 1998;23:2074–2080. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–174. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Feinstein AR. An additional basic science for clinical medicine. IV. The development of clinimetrics. Ann Intern Med 1983;99:843–848. Google Scholar
  • 9 McCombe PF, Fairbank JC, Cockersole BC, Pynsent PB. 1989 Volvo Award in Clinical Sciences: reproducibility of physical signs in low-back pain. Spine 1989;14:908–918. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Poiraudeau S, Foltz V, Drape JL, et al. Value of the bell test and the hyperextension test for diagnosis in sciatica associated with disc herniation: comparison with Lasègue's sign and the crossed Lasègue's sign. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2001;40:460–466. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Fedorak C, Ashworth N, Marshall J, Paull H. Reliability of the visual assessment of cervical and lumbar lordosis: how good are we? Spine 2003;28:1857–1859. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ciatto S, Houssami N, Apruzzese A, et al. Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience). Breast 2006;15:44–51. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Snoey ER, Housset B, Guyon P, ElHaddad S, Valty J, Hericord P. Analysis of emergency department interpretation of electrocardiograms. J Accid Emerg Med 1994;11:149–153. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Holm I, Friis A, Storheim K, Brox JI. Measuring self-reported functional status and pain in patients with chronic low back pain by postal questionnaires: a reliability study. Spine 2003;28:828–833. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Medicare Part B Imaging Services. Rapid spending growth and shift to physician offices indicate need for CMS to consider additional management practices. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2008. Google Scholar

Article History

Published in print: 2009