F Krummenauer1, I Genevrière, U Nixdorff. 1. Department of Medical Statistics and Documentation, Obere Zahlbacher Strasse 69, D-55131, Mainz, Germany. krummi@imsd.uni-mainz.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Biometrical comparison procedures for cardiac imaging methods with continuous outcome are reviewed mainly concentrating on assessment and design adequate comparison of accuracy and precision. Univariate graphical and numerical representation of corresponding deviations is outlined to derive a 'check list' of minimum information necessary to compare the measurement methods. DATA: The methods reviewed here are illustrated by the comparison of standard 2DE bidimensional cardial volumetry versus assessment using TDE colour imaging in 28 normal probands. SOURCES: The paired t-test and the corresponding confidence interval approach are used to assess deviations in location of two imaging methods; the test procedures of Maloney and Rastogi Hahn and Nelson and Grubbs are surveyed as proposals for the comparison of precisions in paired data. The Krippendorff coefficient and the Bradley/Blackwood test are illustrated as surrogate measures for method concordance. CONCLUSIONS: Since these methods can be performed by simple modification of standard options available in most statistics software packages, this review intends to enable cardiologists to choose appropriate methods for statistical data analysis and representation on their own.
OBJECTIVES: Biometrical comparison procedures for cardiac imaging methods with continuous outcome are reviewed mainly concentrating on assessment and design adequate comparison of accuracy and precision. Univariate graphical and numerical representation of corresponding deviations is outlined to derive a 'check list' of minimum information necessary to compare the measurement methods. DATA: The methods reviewed here are illustrated by the comparison of standard 2DE bidimensional cardial volumetry versus assessment using TDE colour imaging in 28 normal probands. SOURCES: The paired t-test and the corresponding confidence interval approach are used to assess deviations in location of two imaging methods; the test procedures of Maloney and Rastogi Hahn and Nelson and Grubbs are surveyed as proposals for the comparison of precisions in paired data. The Krippendorff coefficient and the Bradley/Blackwood test are illustrated as surrogate measures for method concordance. CONCLUSIONS: Since these methods can be performed by simple modification of standard options available in most statistics software packages, this review intends to enable cardiologists to choose appropriate methods for statistical data analysis and representation on their own.