Author/Authors :
Maria Jo?o Cardoso، نويسنده , , Jaime Cardoso، نويسنده , , Nat?lia Amaral، نويسنده , , Isabel Azevedo، نويسنده , , Lise Barreau، نويسنده , , Mario Bernardo، نويسنده , , David Christie، نويسنده , , Susy Costa، نويسنده , , Florian Fitzal، نويسنده , , José L Fougo، نويسنده , , J?rgen Johansen، نويسنده , , Douglas Macmillan، نويسنده , , Maria Piera Mano، نويسنده , , Lea Regolo، نويسنده , , José Rosa، نويسنده , , Lu?s Teixeira، نويسنده , , Conny Vrieling، نويسنده ,
Abstract :
Experts were initially asked to subjectively classify the aesthetic results of 30 photographed cases submitted to breast cancer conservative treatment according to the four-point Harris scale. It was pre-established that if at least two-thirds [Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Santos AC, Barros H, Oliveira MC. Interobserver agreement and consensus over the esthetic evaluation of conservative treatment for breast cancer. Breast 2005] of participants provided the same classification this would be considered a consensual evaluation for that case. For cases where such agreement was not reached, consensus was obtained using a nominal group technique. Experts then individually performed objective evaluation of the same set of photographs using the BCCT.core software. This provides an automatic rating of aesthetic results, once scale and reference points in the photograph have been chosen. Agreement between observers, between each observer and the consensus, for computer evaluation obtained by the different participants and between software and consensus was calculated using multiple kappa (k) and weighted kappa (wk) statistics.
Keywords :
breast cancer , Conservative treatment , Aesthetic result , Expert observers , Nominal consensus , Objective evaluation , Software