IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/thssxx/v5y2016i1p6-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The edit distance approach: an alternate method for assessing multi-observer agreement in process studies

Author

Listed:
  • Rita Snyder
  • José Vidal
  • Bo Cai
  • Nathan Huynh

Abstract

Direct observation of complex health-care processes typically involves multi-observer recording of sequential process tasks. Inference, the key validity threat to multi-observer recording, is controlled with observer training and assessment for the degree of recording consistency across observers. The gold standard for assessing recording consistency is the Kappa statistic, which assumes an exact task sequence match among observers. This assumption, however, is often difficult to meet with health-care process observations where task speed and complexity can result in uneven task sequence recording among observers. The edit distance approach, derived from information string theory, is not predicated on an exact task sequence match and offers an alternative to the Kappa statistic for assessing multi-observer agreement. The paper uses simultaneously recorded process observations with uneven task sequences made by three observers to compare agreement results for the edit distance approach and Kappa statistic. Edit distance approach strengths and limitations are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Rita Snyder & José Vidal & Bo Cai & Nathan Huynh, 2016. "The edit distance approach: an alternate method for assessing multi-observer agreement in process studies," Health Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 6-12, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:thssxx:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:6-12
    DOI: 10.1057/hs.2014.32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1057/hs.2014.32
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/hs.2014.32?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:thssxx:v:5:y:2016:i:1:p:6-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/thss .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.