Interrater Reliability in Systematic Review Methodology

Exploring Variation in Coder Decision-Making

Datos Bibliográficos

ID11610723
AutoresJyoti Belur (0000-0003-2332-6823, Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London, London, UK, autor de correspondencia), Lisa Tompson (0000-0003-3274-8585, Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London, London, UK), Amy Thornton (0000-0001-9322-6073, Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London, London, UK), Miranda Simon (0000-0002-4000-6234, Department of Security and Crime Science, University College London, London, UK)
Año2018
Volumen50
Número2
Páginas837-865
Fecha de publicación2018-09-24
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaSociological Methods & Research (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0049-1241 • E-ISSN: 1552-8294
EditorialSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0049124118799372
OpenAlexW2893300601
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas138
Referencias citadas25

A methodologically sound systematic review is characterized by transparency, replicability, and a clear inclusion criterion. However, little attention has been paid to reporting the details of interrater reliability (IRR) when multiple coders are used to make decisions at various points in the screening and data extraction stages of a study. Prior research has mentioned the paucity of information on IRR including number of coders involved, at what stages and how IRR tests were conducted, and how disagreements were resolved. This article examines and reflects on the human factors that affect decision-making in systematic reviews via reporting on three IRR tests, conducted at three different points in the screening process, for two distinct reviews. Results of the two studies are discussed in the context of IRR and intrarater reliability in terms of the accuracy, precision, and reliability of coding behavior of multiple coders. Findings indicated that coding behavior changes both between and within individuals over time, emphasizing the importance of conducting regular and systematic IRR and intrarater reliability tests, especially when multiple coders are involved, to ensure consistency and clarity at the screening and coding stages. Implications for good practice while screening/coding for systematic reviews are discussed

CLARITY · Coding (social sciences · Data extraction · Developmental psychology · Inter-rater reliability · Intra-rater reliability · MEDLINE · Rating scale · Reliability (semiconductor · Statistics · Systematic review · Transparency (behavior · Applied Psychology · Computer Science · Mathematics · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews · Psychology · Psychometric Methodologies and Testing · Reliability and Agreement in Measurement