Error in histologic dating of secretory endometrium: variance component analysis

Gibson M, Badger GJ, Byrn F, Lee KR, Korson R, Trainer TD

doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)54479-3

Error in histologic dating of secretory endometrium: variance component analysis

Mark Gibson, K R Lee, Francis W. Byrn, G J Badger, R Korson, T D Trainer

University of Vermont ROR

Fertility and Sterility, 56(2), 242-247

DOI 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)54479-3 PMID 2070853

Abstract

Objective

To characterize the extent and sources of imprecision in histologic dating of the endometrial biopsy.

Design

Duplicate endometrial biopsies from 25 women were dated by five evaluators on two separate occasions to evaluate the overall precision of the measure. Using variance component analysis, estimates of intrauterine, intraevaluator, and interevaluator variability were determined.

Setting

Samples were obtained during outpatient fertility testing. Evaluators were colleagues at the same institution.

PATIENTS,

Participants

Women presenting with infertility undergoing routine evaluation.

Interventions

None.

Main Outcome Measure

Variability in histologic dating of the endometrium.

Results

Inconsistencies between evaluators accounted for 65% of the observed variability, whereas 27% was because of inconsistencies in duplicate readings by the same evaluator. Regional differences in the uterus accounted for only 8% of the total variability.

Conclusions

The overall error from these sources have the potential to result in a substantial false-positive rate for diagnosis of luteal phase defect.

Topics

Menstrual Cycle > Luteal Phase > Luteal Phase Defect Diagnosis Diagnostics > Histology > Endometrial Biopsy Accuracy Research Methodology > Measurement Error > Observer Variability

endometrial biopsy histologic dating error variance analysis, luteal phase defect diagnosis accuracy endometrial dating, inter-observer variability endometrial biopsy dating secretory phase, endometrial dating imprecision sources of error pathology, Gibson variance component analysis endometrial biopsy reliability, false positive rate luteal phase deficiency endometrial dating, intraevaluator interevaluator variability endometrial histology, secretory endometrium biopsy reproducibility infertility evaluation, endometrial dating disagreement pathologist interpretation, regional uterine differences endometrial biopsy sampling error

PMID 2070853 2070853 DOI 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)54479-3 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)54479-3

Cite this article

Gibson, M., Badger, G. J., Byrn, F., Lee, K. R., Korson, R., & Trainer, T. D. (1991). Error in histologic dating of secretory endometrium: variance component analysis. *Fertility and sterility*, *56*(2), 242-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)54479-3

Keywords

Analysis of Variance, Biopsy/standards, Endometrium/anatomy & Histology/pathology, False Positive Reactions, Female, Humans, Luteal Phase/physiology, Observer Variation

Error in histologic dating of secretory endometrium: variance component analysis

Abstract

Topics

Cite this article

Keywords

Related articles

Clinical evaluation of luteal function

Neonatal characteristics of children conceived with in vitro fertilization or intrauterine insemination compared with sibling births from unassisted conceptions

Disordered eating behaviors during adolescence and risk of endometriosis: a prospective cohort study

"Reply of the authors: ""Response to ""The illusion of reproductive choice: how restorative reproductive medicine violates informed consent for infertility treatment"""""