Skip to main content
. 2003 Jan 28;88(2):195–201. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6600715

Table 1. Comparison between % PABS method and numeric counting.

  %PABSa
  No. of bone lesionsb
 
Recorder BSc-1 BS-2 BS-3 BS-4 BS-5 Measuring time (min) BS-1 BS-2 BS-3 BS-4 BS-5 Measuring time (min)
A 9.01 8.70 9.38 3.40 8.67 17 61 66 69 21 39 7
B 8.99 8.57 9.10 3.50 9.11 15 58 62 66 20 44 8
C 9.16 8.77 9.32 3.45 9.07 16 66 58 58 18 38 6
D 9.22 8.65 9.45 3.49 9.22 20 48 60 70 24 42 8
E 9.15 8.44 9.33 3.52 8.99 15 56 62 60 22 48 5
Mean 9.11 8.63 9.32 3.47 9.01 16.60 57.80 61.60 64.60 21.00 42.20 6.80
s.d.d 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.21 2.07 6.65 2.97 5.37 2.24 4.03 1.30
CVe (%) 1.10 1.50 1.40 1.40 2.30 12.50 11.50 4.80 8.30 10.60 9.50 19.20
a

NIH Image computerised measurement.

b

Visually counting.

c

Bone scintigraphy.

d

Standard deviation.

e

Coefficient of variation.