Copyright
©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Clin Cases. Dec 6, 2024; 12(34): 6687-6695
Published online Dec 6, 2024. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i34.6687
Published online Dec 6, 2024. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i34.6687
Table 1 Demographic data of the patients analyzed in the study
Characteristics | n |
Sex | |
Total, n = 391 | |
Females | 247 (63.2) |
Males | 144 (36.8) |
Age | |
Mean | 45.26 |
Standard deviation | 16.72 |
Minimum | 18 |
Maximum | 96 |
Age groups | |
18 and 19 | 18 |
20-29 | 63 |
30-39 | 72 |
40-49 | 77 |
50-59 | 71 |
60-69 | 60 |
70-79 | 21 |
80-89 | 8 |
90-99 | 1 |
Table 2 Results of the intraclass correlation coefficient analyses
Parameter | Subparameter | 95 %CI | Intraclass correlation coefficient | |
Lower bound | Upper bound | |||
Reviewer 1 | SBA | 0.998 | 0.999 | 0.998 |
mSBA | 0.999 | 0.999 | 0.999 | |
Reviewer 2 | SBA | 0.997 | 0.998 | 0.997 |
mSBA | 0.999 | 0.999 | 0.999 | |
R1 vs R2 for M1 | SBA | 0.997 | 0.998 | 0.998 |
mSBA | 0.998 | 0.999 | 0.998 | |
R1 vs R2 for M2 | SBA | 0.996 | 0.997 | 0.996 |
mSBA | 0.999 | 0.999 | 0.999 |
Table 3 Comparison of the measured skull base angles between females and males
Interpretations by the reviewers | Female | Male | P value |
SBA | |||
R1 | 132.19 ± 4.88 | 130.92 ± 4.52 | 0.011 |
R2 | 132.22 ± 4.88 | 130.96 ± 4.49 | 0.012 |
mSBA | |||
R1 | 118.23 ± 3.72 | 116.20 ± 3.66 | < 0.001 |
R2 | 118.19 ± 3.70 | 116.20 ± 3.63 | < 0.001 |
Table 4 Correlation between skull base angle measurements and age
Measurement and reviewer | Correlation coefficient | P value |
SBA measurement by R1 | 0.014 | 0.788 |
SBA measurement by R2 | 0.021 | 0.685 |
mSBA measurement by R1 | -0.235 | < 0.001 |
mSBA measurement by R2 | -0.233 | < 0.001 |
- Citation: Kizilgoz V, Aydin S, Aydemir H, Keles P, Kantarci M. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of skull base angles measured on magnetic resonance images. World J Clin Cases 2024; 12(34): 6687-6695
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v12/i34/6687.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v12.i34.6687