Table 3:
Distribution of the abnormal swallow tail sign across diagnosesa
| Controls (n = 21) | LBD (n = 19) | FTD (n = 20) | AD (n = 20) | MCI (n = 17) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abnormal, 1.5T and 3T (No.) (%) | |||||
| Rater 1 | 2 (10) | 9 (47) | 7 (35) | 5 (25) | 2 (12) |
| Rater 2 | 5 (24) | 18 (95) | 8 (40) | 9 (45) | 4 (24) |
| Consensus | 2 (10) | 12 (63) | 7 (35) | 5 (25) | 1 (6) |
| 1.5T | n = 12 | n = 4 | n = 7 | n = 13 | n = 7 |
| Abnormal, 1.5T (No. (%) | |||||
| Rater 1 | 2 (17) | 1 (25) | 3 (43) | 3 (23) | 2 (29) |
| Rater 2 | 4 (33) | 4 (100) | 1 (14) | 6 (46) | 1 (14) |
| Consensus | 2 (17) | 3 (75) | 4 (57) | 3 (23) | 1 (14) |
| 3T | n = 9 | n = 15 | n = 13 | n = 7 | n = 10 |
| Rater 1 | 0 (0) | 8 (53) | 4 (31) | 2 (29) | 0 (0) |
| Rater 2 | 1 (11) | 14 (93) | 7 (54) | 3 (43) | 3 (30) |
| Consensus | 0 (0) | 9 (60) | 3 (23) | 2 (29) | 0 (0) |
a
Rater 1, S.H.; rater 2, S.S. Missing cases represent unsure raters due to low-quality images.