Table 2.

Agreement analysis of Safety, Efficiency, and DIGEST grades at different frame rates

Grade	FPS	No. of disagreements out of 315 pairs	Over estimation (%)	Under estimation (%)	Agreement percentage (%)	Simple Cohen’s Kappa (95% CI)	Weighted Cohen’s Kappa 95% CI)	PABAK (95% CI)	AC1 (95% CI)
Safety	30 vs. 15	40	12 (3.81)	28 (8.89)	87.30	0.819 (0.767, 0.870)	0.860 (0.788, 0.932)	0.841 (0.795, 0.887)	0.846 (0.801, 0.891)
	30 vs. 7.5	38	13 (4.13)	25 (7.94)	87.94	0.827 (0.777, 0.878)	0.870 (0.798, 0.942)	0.849 (0.804, 0.894)	0.854 (0.810, 0.898)
	15 vs. 7.5	39	22 (6.98)	17 (5.40)	87.62	0.821 (0.769, 0.873)	0.858 (0.785, 0.931)	0.845 (0.800, 0.891)	0.850 (0.806, 0.895)
Efficiency	30 vs. 15	40	25 (7.94)	15 (4.76)	87.30	0.823 (0.773, 0.873)	0.859 (0.785, 0.933)	0.841 (0.795, 0.887)	0.845 (0.800, 0.890)
	30 vs. 7.5	44	32 (10.16)	12 (3.81)	86.03	0.805 (0.753, 0.858)	0.850 (0.776, 0.923)	0.825 (0.778, 0.873)	0.830 (0.783, 0.877)
	15 vs. 7.5	43	26 (8.25)	17 (5.40)	86.35	0.811 (0.759, 0.862)	0.850 (0.777, 0.923)	0.829 (0.782, 0.877)	0.830 (0.783, 0.877)
DIGEST	30 vs. 15	47	21 (6.67)	26 (8.25)	85.08	0.804 (0.752, 0.855)	0.844 (0.777, 0.910)	0.814 (0.764, 0.863)	0.816 (0.767, 0.864)
	30 vs. 7.5	42	25 (7.94)	17 (5.40)	86.67	0.825 (0.775, 0.874)	0.865 (0.797, 0.930)	0.833 (0.786, 0.880)	0.835 (0.789, 0.882)
	15 vs. 7.5	41	26 (8.25)	15 (4.76)	86.98	0.829 (0.780, 0.877)	0.863 (0.796, 0.930)	0.837 (0.791, 0.884)	0.839 (0.794, 0.885)