Skip to main content

Table 1 Estimated parameters, goodness-of-fit statistics and estimated dose reduction for GWscore

From: Regression models for analyzing radiological visual grading studies – an empirical comparison

Model Coefficient Goodness-of-fit Dose reduction
logCTDI id2 id4 AIC Pseudo R2 id2 id4
  Est. P-value Est. P-value Est. P-value
regressa 1.459 <0.001 0.158 <0.001 0.208 <0.001 - 0.4160 10.29 % 13.31 %
(1.244, 1.674) (0.082, 0.234) (0.132, 0.284) (6.14 %, 14.43 %) (9.37 %, 17.24 %)
ologita 8.825 <0.001 0.966 <0.001 1.271 <0.001 1124.35 0.4172 10.37 % 13.41 %
(7.354, 10.295) (0.512, 1.419) (0.812, 1.730) (6.35 %, 14.39 %) (9.60 %, 17.23 %)
gologit2a =2 9.487 <0.001 1.262 <0.001 1.465 <0.001 1184.56 0.4342 12.45 % 14.31 %
(7.213, 11.761) (0.682, 1.842) (0.873, 2.058) (7.44 %, 17.46 %) (9.25 %, 19.37 %)
gologit2a =3 8.165 <0.001 0.521 0.172 0.985 0.008 6.18 % 11.37 %
(6.143, 10.189) (−.227, 1.269) (0.260, 1.711) (−1.62 %, 13.98 %) (4.87 %, 17.86 %)
slogita 17.447 <0.001 1.887 <0.001 2.433 <0.001 1123.27 0.4201 10.25 % 13.05 %
(14.460, 20.435) (1.028, 2.746) (1.555, 3.310) (6.35 %, 14.15 %) (9.23 %, 16.80 %)
mixedb 1.459 <0.001 0.158 <0.001 0.208 <0.001 1225.30 0.2748 10.29 % 13.31 %
(1.244, 1.673) (0.082, 0.234) (0.132, 0.284) (6.14 %, 14.43 %) (9.38 %, 17.24 %)
meologitb 8.433 <0.001 0.922 <0.001 1.213 <0.001 1215.96 0.2751 10.36 % 13.4 %
(6.685, 10.180) (0.452, 1.392) (0.735, 1.692) (6.21 %, 14.51 %) (9.49 %, 17.32 %)
  1. 95 % confidence limits of each estimate given in parentheses
  2. aregression model with fixed effects only
  3. bregression model with fixed and random effects