Table 5.

Derivation group. Correlation of conventional MR parameters using RLE/FF and histologic parameters according to univariate and multiple regression analyses for reader 1

Parameter	Univariate					Multivariate
RLE	B	p value	Beta	95% CI		B	p value	Beta	95% CI
Steatosis	− 0.171	0.004	− 0.422	− 0.283	− 0.059	− 0.099	0.052	− 0.235	− 0.202	0.012
Inflammation	− 0.234	0.005	− 0.408	− 0.393	− 0.075	− 0.144	0.073	− 0.251	− 0.292	0.004
Ballooning	− 0.159	0.059	− 0.281	− 0.325	0.006
Fibrosis	− 0.164	< 0.001	− 0.500	− 0.251	− 0.078	− 0.132	0.040	− 0.397	− 0.213	− 0.048
FF	B	p value	Beta	95% CI		B	p value	Beta	95% CI
Steatosis	13.776	< 0.001	0.733	9.887	17.666	13.600	< 0.001	0.723	9.9382	17.818
Inflammation	9.757	0.012	0.367	2.245	17.269
Ballooning	2.775	0.485	0.105	− 5.173	10.724
Fibrosis	1.055	0.647	0.069	− 3.564	5.674

If the p value is less than the conventional level of .05, the corresponding variable contributes significantly to the prediction of the dependent variable (RLE or FF). In multiple regression analysis, only liver fibrosis was significantly associated with the relative enhancement measurements (RLE) and only steatosis was significantly associated with fat fraction (FF)

RLE, relative liver enhancement is the mean RLE derived from the calculation according to the formula: Relative Enhancement (RLE) = (PostSI-PreSI)/PreSI, of all liver (9 segments including 4a and 4b) segments

FF, fat fraction is the mean value derived from the calculation according to the formula: [(SIin-SIopp)/2 × SIin] × 100. SIin and SIopp were liver parenchyma signal intensity on in-phase or opposed-phase images of all liver segments (9 segments including 4a and 4b)

B, unstandardized beta representing the slope of the line between the predictor variable and the dependent variable