2002
DOI: 10.1198/016214502753479392
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statistical Methods in Assessing Agreement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
331
0
9

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 372 publications
(340 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
331
0
9
Order By: Relevance
“…2). The level of overall agreement can be measured by the accuracy component C b of the concordance correlation coefficient (18). Specifically, C b lies between 0 and 1 and measures how far the best fit linear relationship between two estimates deviates from the oneto-one line.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2). The level of overall agreement can be measured by the accuracy component C b of the concordance correlation coefficient (18). Specifically, C b lies between 0 and 1 and measures how far the best fit linear relationship between two estimates deviates from the oneto-one line.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CCC represents the variation of the linear relationship between two variables from the 45°line of perfect agreement passing through the origin. 8,9 The CCC analysis provides a measure of precision which corresponds to the Pearson correlation coefficient, and it also delivers a measure of accuracy. The assumption of normal distribution of the differences was checked by the Shapiro-Wilk W-test for normal data.…”
Section: Needle Insertionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Agreement statistics require that a boundary value and CP are set to confidence limits described in Table 4. Agreement between values obtained by XRF methods (EDXRF_EMP, EDXRF_FP and EDXRF_FPML) and values measured using ICP-OES is described using agreement statistics derived by Lin (1989) and Lin et al (2002). These agreement statistics describe the proportion of data that lies within an acceptable boundary Table 4.…”
Section: Developing Empirical Calibrations For Edxrfmentioning
confidence: 99%