Abstract
In clinical measurement comparison of a new measurement technique with an established one is often needed to see whether they agree sufficiently for the new to replace the old. Such investigations are often analysed inappropriately, notably by using correlation coefficients. The use of correlation is misleading. An alternative approach, based on graphical techniques and simple calculations, is described, together with the relation between this analysis and the assessment of repeatability.
Keywords
RepeatabilityCorrelationSimple (philosophy)StatisticsRelation (database)Computer scienceMathematicsData mining
MeSH Terms
DiagnosisHumansPeak Expiratory Flow RateStatistics as Topic
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Repeatability for Gaussian and non‐Gaussian data: a practical guide for biologists
Repeatability (more precisely the common measure of repeatability, the intra‐class correlation coefficient, ICC) is an important index for quantifying the accuracy of measuremen...
Observer Reliability and Agreement
Abstract The terms observer reliability and observer agreement represent different concepts. Reliability coefficients express the ability to differentiate between subjects. Agre...
Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients
Summary 1. Linear regression models are an important statistical tool in evolutionary and ecological studies. Unfortunately, these models often yield some uninterpretable estima...
Any casualties in the clash of randomised and observational evidence?
Randomised controlled trials and observational studies are often seen as mutually exclusive, if not opposing, methods of clinical research. Two recent reports, however, identifi...
Analysis of Clinical Methods Used to Evaluate Dyspnea in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
When dyspnea must be assessed clinically, there are three methods of assessment: the measurement of dyspnea with activities of daily living using clinical dyspnea ratings such a...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1986
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 327
- Issue
- 8476
- Pages
- 307-310
- Citations
- 46643
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Altmetric
PlumX Metrics
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
46643
OpenAlex
3070
Influential
36754
CrossRef
Cite This
J Martin Bland,
DouglasG. Altman
(1986).
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT.
The Lancet
, 327
(8476)
, 307-310.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8
- PMID
- 2868172