Table 3 Overall agreement
3a: Contingency table logic | |||||
Change in level of added benefit or evidence | Federal Joint Committee | ||||
+ | – | ||||
IQWiG | + | no change (with added benefit) | downgrade by FJC | ||
– | upgrade by FJC | no change (no added benefit) | |||
3b: Cohen’s kappa for the agreement of added benefit IQWiG addenda verus FJC appraisals | |||||
Level of added benefit | Federal Joint Committee | ||||
+ | – | ||||
n | %b | n | %b | ||
IQWiG | + | 23 | 18.55% | 19 | 15.32% |
– | 29 | 23.39% | 53 | 42.74% | |
Addenda: | 90 | Subgroupsa: | 124 | k = 0.183 (SE: 0.088; CI95%: 0.010–0.357) | |
Added benefit FJC versus IQWiG: OR = 2.33 (CI95%: 1.02–5.36; p = 0.028) | |||||
3c: Cohen’s kappa for the agreement of evidence quality IQWiG addenda versus FJC appraisals | |||||
Level of evidence | Federal Joint Committee | ||||
+ | – | ||||
n | %b | n | %b | ||
IQWiG | + | 32 | 25.81% | 17 | 13.71% |
– | 22 | 17.74% | 53 | 42.74% | |
Addenda: | 90 | Subgroupsa: | 124 | k = 0.353 (SE: 0.085; CI95%: 0.187–0.520) | |
Improvement of evidence quality FJC versus IQWiG: OR = 4.53 (CI95%:1.96–10.59; p < 0.0001 | |||||