Skip to main content
. 2015 Feb 27;91(5):443–451. doi: 10.3109/09553002.2015.1012305

Table III. Sample ANOVA analysis of data from year 2008; dose delivered = 1.8 Gy.

Laba nb Conventional method   QuickScan method   CBMN
50 cells   20 cells   50 cells   20 cells   200 cells
d ± SDc n d ± SD n d ± SD n d ± SD n d ± SD
1 4 2.05 ± 0.10 4 2.18 ± 0.38 4 2.03 ± 0.53 4 2.03 ± 0.53 4 2.78 ± 0.52
2 2 1.50 ± 0.71 2 1.80 ± 0.42 2 2.35 ± 0.35 2 2.35 ± 0.35 2 1.30 ± 0.71
3 6 2.00 ± 0.20 6 1.95 ± 0.23 7 1.97 ± 0.60 7 1.84 ± 0.71 7 2.16 ± 0.27
4 2 2.05 ± 0.21 2 2.20 ± 0.42 2 1.55 ± 0.21 2 1.35 ± 0.49   –
5 2 2.35 ± 0.21 2 2.40 ± 0.28 2 1.60 ± 0.57 2 1.00 ± 1.41   –
6 2 2.40 ± 0.28 2 1.95 ± 0.07   –   –   –
dF (p-value)   2.79 (0.0678)   1.18 (0.3735)   0.77 (0.5623)   1.21 (0.3574)   8.46 (0.0071)
                    Lab 1 > Lab 2 (p = 0.0057)

CBMN, cytokinesis block micronucleus. aLabs having less than two observations for a specific method by cell count were not included in the analysis. bn is the number of scorers in the lab that participated in the dose estimation exercise for the method. cd ± SD represents the average dose and standard deviation from the lab from all scorers. Where only one scorer from the lab participated then only that scorer’s dose estimate is reported. dThe row F test is testing the null hypothesis of no difference in dose estimates between the different labs within a method and cell count.