Table 2.

Intraclass correlations between (1) manually and visually assessed whole liver and segmental PDFF changes and (2) readers for inter-reader agreement. Visually assessed PDFF changes achieved strong agreement with the manual reference (ICCs > 0.95) and inter-reader agreement was also strong (ICCs > 0.96) with exception of segment 2 (ICC = 0.93)

Segment	Manual reference vs reader visual			Inter-reader visual
	Reader 1	Reader 2	Reader 3
Whole	0.99 (0.98, 1.00)	0.99 (0.99, 1.00)	0.99 (0.97, 1.00)	0.99 (0.99, 1.00)
I	0.95 (0.92, 0 97)	0.97 (0.93, 0.98)	0.96 (0.93, 0.98)	0.96 (0.93, 0.98)
II	0.86 (0.71, 0.92)	0.95 (0.88, 0.98)	0.91 (0.73, 0.97)	0.93 (0.88, 0.97)
III	0.98 (0.95, 0.99)	0.96 (0.93, 0.98)	0.95 (0.92, 0.98)	0.96 (0.93, 1.00)
IVa	0.98 (0.94, 0.99)	0.98 (0.95, 0.99)	0.94 (0.76, 0.99)	0.97 (0.92, 1.00)
IVb	0.95 (0.93, 0.98)	0.98 (0.95, 0.99)	0.96 (0.93, 0.98)	0.96 (0.94, 0.98)
V	0.97 (0.94, 0.99)	0.98 (0.96, 0.99)	0.98 (0.95, 0.99)	0.97 (0.94, 0.99)
VI	0.98 (0.96, 0.99)	0.98 (0.95, 0.99)	0.98 (0.97, 0.99)	0.98 (0.96, 1.00)
VII	0.98 (0.96, 0.99)	0.97 (0.94, 0.99)	0.98 (0.96, 0.99)	0.99 (0.96, 1.00)
VIII	0.97 (0.92, 0.98)	0.98 (0.97, 0.99)	0.97 (0.93, 0.98)	0.98 (0.96, 1.00)