Table 4.
SDLP symmetry analysis.
| Threshold | Number of subjects |
Proportion |
McNemar statistic | p value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Impaired | Improved | Neutral | Impaired | Improved | |||
| 1.00 | 19 | 2 | 9 | 0.63 | 0.07 | 13.76 | 0.0002 |
| 1.25 | 18 | 2 | 10 | 0.60 | 0.07 | 12.80 | 0.0004 |
| 1.50 | 18 | 2 | 10 | 0.60 | 0.07 | 12.80 | 0.0004 |
| 1.75 | 17 | 2 | 11 | 0.57 | 0.07 | 11.84 | 0.0007 |
| 2.00 | 16 | 2 | 12 | 0.53 | 0.07 | 10.89 | 0.0013 |
| 2.25 | 16 | 2 | 12 | 0.53 | 0.07 | 10.89 | 0.0013 |
| 2.50 | 13 | 2 | 15 | 0.43 | 0.07 | 8.07 | 0.0074 |
| 2.75 | 13 | 2 | 15 | 0.43 | 0.07 | 8.07 | 0.0074 |
| 3.00 | 13 | 2 | 15 | 0.43 | 0.07 | 8.07 | 0.0074 |
| 3.25 | 13 | 1 | 16 | 0.43 | 0.03 | 10.29 | 0.0018 |
| 3.50 | 11 | 1 | 18 | 0.37 | 0.03 | 8.33 | 0.0063 |
| 3.75 | 10 | 1 | 19 | 0.33 | 0.03 | 7.36 | 0.0117 |
| 4.00 | 9 | 1 | 20 | 0.30 | 0.03 | 6.40 | 0.0215 |
| 4.25 | 9 | 1 | 20 | 0.30 | 0.03 | 6.40 | 0.0215 |
| 4.50 | 7 | 1 | 22 | 0.23 | 0.03 | 4.50 | 0.0703 |
| 4.75 | 7 | 0 | 23 | 0.23 | 0.00 | 7.00 | 0.0156 |
| 5.00 | 6 | 0 | 24 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 6.00 | 0.0313 |
| 5.25 | 6 | 0 | 24 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 6.00 | 0.0313 |
| 5.50 | 6 | 0 | 24 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 6.00 | 0.0313 |
| 5.75 | 6 | 0 | 24 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 6.00 | 0.0313 |
| 6.00 | 5 | 0 | 25 | 0.17 | 0.00 | 5.00 | 0.0625 |
Symmetry analysis was conducted on the SDLP data using a range of impairment thresholds for SDLP. For each threshold, the number of subjects who were impaired, improved, or neither is shown, as is the proportion impaired and improved. Equivalence of the number of impaired and unimpaired subjects was tested using McNemar’s test, with p values calculated using an exact binomial test.
SDLP, standard deviation of lateral lane position.