Table 3.

Subcutaneous Thickness Averages, Measurement Errors, and Reliability by Image Categorization

		Rater 1		Rater 2			Inter-rater
	N	Mean (SD)	SEM	Mean (SD)	SEM	p*	ICC***
All	63	3.03 (2.22)	0.28	3.45 (2.54)	0.32	<0.01	0.97
95% CI							0.92–0.99
S. Axis	31	3.21 (2.37)	0.43	3.47 (2.68)	0.48	0.02	0.98
95% CI							0.96 – 0.99
L. Axis	32	2.84 (2.09)	0.37	3.43 (2.44)	0.43	<0.01	0.96
95% CI							0.80 – 0.99
Floating	31	3.34 (2.31)	0.42	3.93 (2.79)	0.50	<0.01	0.97
95% CI							0.85 – 0.98
Surface	32	2.72 (2.12)	0.38	2.99 (2.23)	0.39	0.01	0.98
95% CI							0.95 – 0.99
S. Axis x Floating	15	3.80 (2.72)	0.70	4.19 (3.09)	0.80	0.03	0.98
95% CI							0.94 – 1.0
S. Axis x Surface	16	2.67 (1.94)	0.48	2.80 (2.12)	0.53	0.35	0.98
95% CI							0.95 – 0.99
L. Axis x Floating	16	2.92 (1.85)	0.46	3.68 (2.55)	0.64	<0.01	0.94
95% CI							0.60 – 0.98
L. Axis x Surface	16	2.77 (2.36)	0.60	3.17 (2.38)	0.60	<0.01	0.98
95% CI							0.90 – 0.99

S. Axis = Short Axis; L. Axis = Long Axis; SEM= Standard Error of the Mean, and 95% confidence interval (CI) is assumed. Rater 1 and Rater 2 reliability for each image categorization were all .99 with 95% CI 0.99– 1.0.

^*p-value for paired t-test between rater 1 and rater 2 on same image; due to missing values, data not equally paired by site for short/long or floating/surface, so comparison between values within rater for these variables should not be made using these data.

^**two-way mixed effects model for consistency;

^***two-way random effects model for agreement