. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Dec 18.

Published in final edited form as: Proc IEEE Int Symp Biomed Imaging. 2018 May 24;2018:1445–1448. doi: 10.1109/ISBI.2018.8363844

Table 1.

The mean (and std. dev.) Dice Coefficient for MGDM [4], RF+Graph [15], Algorithm C, and Algorithm N over 37 subjects.

	RNFL	GCIP	INL	OPL	ONL	IS	OS	RPE

MGDM	0.903 (±0.028)	0.911 (±0.029)	0.812 (±0.034)	0.860 (±0.024)	0.927 (±0.016)	0.805 (±0.022)	0.845 (±0.030)	0.900 (±0.027)

RF+Graph	0.877 (±0.053)	0.892 (±0.053)	0.806 (±0.026)	0.855 (±0.016)	0.909 (±0.019)	0.751 (±0.030)	0.816 (±0.032)	0.884 (±0.023)

Algorithm C	0.903 (±0.026)	0.912^* (±0.030)	0.826^* (±0.031)	0.865 (±0.023)	0.927 (±0.017)	0.815^* (±0.021)	0.846 (±0.027)	0.901 (±0.028)

Algorithm N	0.900 (±0.027)	0.910 (±0.031)	0.817^* (±0.033)	0.857 (±0.025)	0.924 (±0.018)	0.806 (±0.023)	0.841 (±0.028)	0.899 (±0.027)

Statistically significant improvement based on a paired Wilcoxon rank sum test between MGDM and either Algorithm C or Algorithm N is denoted by *, with an α level of 0.001 and no multiple comparison correction.