Table 1.

Comparison of LAX plane location and angulation differences between readers and deep learning

		Intra-reader 1 difference	DL-reader 1 difference	P-value	Inter-reader difference	DL-reader 2 difference	P-value
2CH	$\Delta d$ (mm)	8.3 (7.3,13.3)	5.9 (5.0,7.0)	0.20	14.4 (7.1,21.8)	13.4 (7.9,20.0)	0.91
	$\Delta \theta$ (degree)	7.8 (5.4,14.1)	7.3 (4.7,11.2)	0.57	10.6 (7.2,11.8)	10.9 (5.1,14.2)	0.75
3CH	$\Delta d$ (mm)	11.2 (8.0,14.2)	6.9 (6.0,7.5)a	0.04	15.3 (9.2,18.4)	15.5 (10.8,18.7)	0.76
	$\Delta \theta$ (degree)	8.6 (5.7,10.3)	9.3 (7.7,12.5)	0.35	12.2 (11.9,18.4)	15.5 (11.4,21.2)	0.71
4CH	$\Delta d$ (mm)	15.9 (10.6,19.5)	6.5 (3.7,7.5)a	0.003	12.1 (8.5,13.7)	9.6 (9.1,12.7)	0.84
	$\Delta \theta$ (degree)	7.3 (6.0,10.1)	7.0 (4.0,8.8)	0.35	10.6 (5.3,13.4)	11.1 (8.7,12.9)	0.82

Intra-reader 1 differences represent variation in planes planned by the same reader 6 months apart. Given that the DL approach was trained on slice planning by reader 1, DL-reader 1 differences were compared to intra-reader 1 differences. Inter-reader variation captures variation in slice planning by two different readers. DL-reader 2 differences were compared to inter-reader values. Differences were reported as median (IQR).

^aIndicates a significant difference (P < 0.05).