Self- and informant-ratings of functional abilities are used to diagnose mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and are commonly measured in clinical trials. Ratings are assumed to be accurate, yet they are subject to biases. Biases in self-ratings have been found in individuals with dementia who are older and more depressed and in caregivers with higher distress, burden, and education. This study aimed to extend prior findings using an objective approach to identify determinants of bias in ratings.

Participants were 118 individuals with MCI and their informants. Three discrepancy variables were generated including the discrepancies between (1) self- and informant-rated functional status, (2) informant-rated functional status and objective cognition (in those with MCI), and (3) self-rated functional status and objective cognition. These variables served as dependent variables in forward linear regression models, with demographics, stress, burden, depression, and self-efficacy as predictors.

Informants with higher stress rated individuals with MCI as having worse functional abilities relative to objective cognition. Individuals with MCI with worse self-efficacy rated their functional abilities as being worse compared to objective cognition. Informant-ratings were worse than self-ratings for informants with higher stress and individuals with MCI with higher self-efficacy.

This study highlights biases in subjective ratings of functional abilities in MCI. The risk for relative underreporting of functional abilities by individuals with higher stress levels aligns with previous research. Bias in individuals with MCI with higher self-efficacy may be due to anosognosia. Findings have implications for the use of subjective ratings for diagnostic purposes and as outcome measures.

The aim of this study was to evaluate contact endoscopy in detecting local treatment failures post-radiotherapy in squamous cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract.

A total of 135 consecutive patients with suspected residual or recurrent cancer after definitive radiotherapy underwent contact endoscopy before biopsy. Contact endoscopy findings were compared with histopathological examination findings. Contact endoscopy could not be completed in 7 patients (5.9 per cent) and histopathological examination was inconclusive in 5 patients (3.7 per cent). The findings of the remaining 123 patients were compared.

The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of contact endoscopy were 88.75, 88.72 and 86.99 per cent, respectively, with similar results across various sites of upper aerodigestive tract. Inter-observer kappa value was 0.86 (95 per cent confidence interval: 0.79–0.93). The intra-observer kappa value was 0.93 (95 per cent confidence interval: 0.87–1.00) for the first observer and 0.95 (95 per cent confidence interval: 0.90–1.00) for second and third observers.

Contact endoscopy showed the same high sensitivity and specificity with low inter- and intra-observer variability in detecting post-radiotherapy failures in cancer of the upper aerodigestive tract as has been shown in non-irradiated tissues in earlier studies.

Relative to dementia, little is known about informant bias in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We investigated the influence of informant demographic and relational characteristics on reports of everyday functioning using the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ).

Four thousand two hundred eighty-four MCI participants and their informants from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set were included. Informants were stratified according to cohabitation, relationship, visit frequency, race/ethnicity, education, and sex. Informant-rated Mean FAQ score was compared across these groups using univariate general linear model analyses and post hoc tests. Interactions were tested between informant variables. The predictive contribution of informant variables to FAQ score was explored using hierarchical linear regression. Analyses covaried for participant cognition using a cognitive composite score, and for participant age, sex, and depression.

After controlling for participant cognition, depression, age, and sex, informant-rated FAQ scores varied significantly across all informant variables (p’s < .005, ηp2’s ≤ .033) except sex and visit frequency. FAQ scores were higher (more impaired) among informants who cohabitate with the participant, among paid caregivers, spouses, and adult children, and among informants with higher levels of education. Scores were lowest (less impaired) among Black/African American informants as compared to all other racial/ethnic groups.

Demographic and relational characteristics of informants influence the perception and reporting of instrumental activities of daily living in adults with MCI. As everyday functioning is crucial for differential diagnosis and treatment outcome measurement, it is important to be aware of sources of informant report discrepancies.

Presently used evaluation techniques rely on 3 traditional dimensions: reports from observers, registration system data, and observational cameras. Some of these techniques are observer-dependent and are not reproducible for a second review. This proof-of-concept study aimed to test the feasibility of extending evaluation to a fourth dimension, the patient’s perspective.

Footage was obtained during a large, full-scale hospital trauma drill. Two mock victims were equipped with point-of-view cameras filming from the patient’s head. Based on the Major Incident Hospital’s first experience during the drill, a protocol was developed for a prospective, standardized method to evaluate a hospital’s major incident response from the patient’s perspective. The protocol was then tested in a second drill for its feasibility.

New insights were gained after review of the footage. The traditional observer missed some of the evaluation points, which were seen on the point-of-view cameras. The information gained from the patient’s perspective proved to be implementable into the designed protocol.

Use of point-of-view camera recordings from a mock patient’s perspective is a valuable addition to traditional evaluation of trauma drills and trauma care. Protocols should be designed to optimize and objectify judgement of such footage. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:594–599)

Studies demonstrate the significance of intra- and inter-observer variability when measuring cerebellopontine angle tumours on magnetic resonance imaging, with measured differences as high as 2 mm.

To determine intra- and inter-observer measurement variability of cerebellopontine angle tumours in a specialised institution.

The magnetic resonance imaging maximal diameter of 12 randomly selected cerebellopontine angle tumours were independently measured by 4 neuroradiologists at a tertiary referral centre using a standard definition for maximal tumour diameter. Average deviation and intraclass correlation were subsequently calculated.

Inter-observer difference averaged 0.33 ± 0.04 mm (range, 0.0–0.8 mm). Intra-observer measurements were more consistent than inter-observer measurements, with differences averaging 0.17 mm (95 per cent confidence interval = 0.27–0.06, p = 0.002). Inter-observer reliability was 0.99 (95 per cent confidence interval = 0.97–0.99), suggesting high reliability between the readings.

The use of a standard definition for maximal tumour volume provided high reliability amongst radiologists' readings. To avoid oversizing tumours, it is recommended that conservative monitoring be conducted by the same institution with thin slice magnetic resonance imaging scans.