Defining the Clinical Phenotypic Ground Truth: Expert Interrater Agreement in Hyperkinetic Movement Disorders
Open Access
- 5 October 2026
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Movement Disorders Clinical Practice
Abstract
Background: Reliable clinical phenotyping is crucial for diagnosis, treatment, and research in hyperkinetic movement disorders, yet its interrater reliability remains uncertain. Objectives: To quantify interrater agreement in clinical phenotyping of hyperkinetic movement disorders among experts in a large, phenotypically diverse cohort. Methods: Within the NEMO project, 161 patients with hyperkinetic movement disorders underwent standardized video assessments. Each patient was independently classified by three international movement disorders experts in a structured, stepwise procedure. Experts first assessed videos alone, then received clinical history and examination, and finally diagnostic test results. At each step, they assigned primary and secondary phenotypes and rated their diagnostic confidence. Interrater agreement was assessed using Fleiss’ and Cohen's kappa. Results: Across all phenotypes, interrater agreement on the primary phenotype increased with added information ( κ = 0.457 to κ = 0.607). Agreement with the NEMO reference classification similarly improved ( κ = 0.478 to κ = 0.656). Among patients with a single dominant phenotype, agreement reached κ = 0.78. In 93% of cases, at least two out of three experts reached consensus. Agreement was substantially lower in patients with mixed or complex presentations, such as myoclonus‐dystonia and functional movement disorders. Diagnostic certainty rose throughout, though secondary phenotype agreement remained poor. Experts rarely revised initial impressions, suggesting robust pattern recognition but also potential confirmation bias. Conclusions: Movement disorders specialists can reliably identify hyperkinetic phenotypes, even without in‐person assessment. While complex, mixed and functional presentations remain diagnostically challenging, our findings reinforce the value of expert phenotyping in clinical care, training, and research, and provide a benchmark for future studies and computational approaches.Keywords
Funding Information
- European Regional Development Fund (01492947)
- ZonMw (91218013)
This publication has 28 references indexed in Scilit:
- Explainable machine learning for movement disorders - Classification of tremor and myoclonusComputers in Biology and Medicine, 2025
- Inter‐rater Agreement for Movement Disorder Classification in Children with Hyperkinetic Movement DisordersMovement Disorders Clinical Practice, 2024
- Between Nothing and Everything: Phenomenology in Movement DisordersMovement Disorders, 2023
- Machine Learning in Tremor Analysis: Critique and DirectionsMovement Disorders, 2023
- Exploring Interrater Disagreement on Essential Tremor Using a Standardized Tremor Elements AssessmentMovement Disorders Clinical Practice, 2021
- Deep Brain Stimulation in Movement Disorders: From Experimental Surgery to Evidence‐Based TherapyMovement Disorders, 2019
- Spasticity, dyskinesia and ataxia in cerebral palsy: Are we sure we can differentiate them?European Journal of Paediatric Neurology, 2017
- Diagnostic agreement in patients with psychogenic movement disordersMovement Disorders, 2012
- How neurologists think: A cognitive psychology perspective on missed diagnosesAnnals of Neurology, 2010
- Diagnostic Error in Internal MedicineArchives of internal medicine (1960), 2005