Table 1.
Effectiveness for correcting all axial motion from the (a) first reader (total 131 studies), (b) second reader (total 145 studies) identified with axial motion
| Effectiveness | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | <0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | ||||||
| STASYS | 105 | 14 | 11 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| % of total | 80.2 | 10.7 | 8.4 | 0 | 0.8 | 0 |
| MoCo | 92 | 17 | 16 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| % of total | 70.2 | 13.0 | 12.2 | 2.3 | 1.5 | 0.8 |
| (b) | ||||||
| STASYS | 95 | 29 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| % of total | 65.5 | 20.0 | 12.4 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 1.4 |
| MoCo | 89 | 30 | 22 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| % of total | 61.4 | 20.7 | 15.2 | 0.7 | 1.4 | 0.7 |
4: Perfect correction; 3: significant correction; 2: partial correction; 1: slight correction; 0: no correction; and <0: artificial motion introduced.