ArticlePloS one2018
Agreement and reliability statistics for shapes.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Reliability of Spectral-Domain OCT Ellipsoid Zone Area and Shape Measurements in Retinitis Pigmentosa.Translational vision science & technology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We describe a methodology for assessing agreement and reliability among a set of shapes. Motivated by recent studies of the reliability of manually segmented medical images, we focus on shapes composed of rasterized, binary-valued data representing closed geometric regions of interest. The methodology naturally generalizes to N dimensions and other data types, though. We formulate the shape variance, shape correlation and shape intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) in terms of a simple distance metric, the Manhattan norm, which quantifies the absolute difference between any two shapes. We demonstrate applications of this methodology by working through example shape variance calculations in 1-D, for the analysis of overlapping line segments, and 2-D, for the analysis of overlapping regions. We also report the results of a simulated reliability analysis of manually delineated shape boundaries, and we compare the shape ICC with the more conventional and commonly used area ICC. The proposed shape-sensitive methodology captures all of the variation in the shape measurements, and it provides a more accurate estimate of the measurement reliability than an analysis of only the measured areas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.