Skip to main content

Table 2 Estimated parameters, goodness-of-fit statistics and estimated dose reduction for BGscore

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 1.329 <0.001 0.129 0.001 0.183 <0.001 - 0.3645 9.26 % 12.88 %
(1.113, 1.546) (0.052, 0.206) (0.107, 0.260) (4.58 %, 13.94 %) (8.50 %, 17.26 %)
ologita 8.249 <0.001 0.760 0.001 1.071 <0.001 1135.11 0.3705 8.80 % 12.17 %
(6.766, 9.732) (0.321, 1.200) (0.623, 1.520) (4.44 %, 13.17 %) (8.00 %, 16.35 %)
gologit2a 7.804 <0.001 0.883 0.001 1.431 <0.001 1190.70 0.3915 10.69 % 16.76 %
=2 (5.807, 9.801) (0.368, 1.398) (0.877, 1.986) (5.18 %, 16.21 %) (10.97 %, 22.55 %)
gologit2a 7.842 <0.001 0.505 0.261 0.408 0.369 6.24 % 5.07 %
=3 (5.577, 10.107) (−.376, 1.387) (−.481, 1.298) (−3.27 %, 15.76 %) (−4.86 %, 15.00 %)
slogita 15.378 <0.001 1.337 0.001 2.036 <0.001 1124.99 0.3791 8.33 % 12.40 %
(12.340, 18.42) (0.577, 2.098) (1.246, 2.826) (4.17 %, 12.48 %) (8.30 %, 16.50 %)
mixedb 1.329 <0.001 0.129 0.001 0.183 <0.001 1224.58 0.2207 9.26 % 12.88 %
(1.114,1.545) (0.053, 0.206) (0.107, 0.260) (4.59 %, 13.93 %) (8.51 %, 17.26 %)
meologitb 7.806 <0.001 0.736 <0.001 1.031 <0.001 1216.93 0.2230 9.00 % 12.38 %
(6.733, 8.879) (0.327, 1.146) (.618, 1.445) (4.52 %, 13.48 %) (8.09 %, 16.67 %)
  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