This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Karla Zadnik, OD, PhD; Donald O. Mutti, OD, PhD
Berkeley, Calif

Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111(5):582-583.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—We read the article by El-Maghraby et al¹ in the July 1992 issue of the ARCHIVES with specific interest in the generic analysis of data on the reproducibility of measurement techniques. We would like to suggest to the authors, the ARCHIVES reviewers, and the ophthalmic community at large a simple analysis technique for method comparison data that avoids the pitfalls of the correlation coefficient method employed by El-Maghraby and coworkers.¹

As outlined by British statisticians Altman and Bland,^2,3 a simple plot of the difference between (in this case) the measurements made by two different technicians and the mean of those two measures would provide a more informative, intuitive, and statistically correct analysis of the reproducibility of the laser flare/cell meter. The mean of the differences represents the bias present between the two observers, the two measurement methods, or the two occasions, and the 95% . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?