Table 3:

Intrareader agreement demonstrated with binary groupings of new and improved lesions using both conventional side-by-side comparison and the softwarea

New Lesions (κ) (95% CI)Improved Lesions (κ) (95% CI)
One or more lesions
    VTS 1st vs VTS 2nd read1.0000.937 (0.815–1.000)
    CSSC 1st vs CSSC 2nd read0.941 (0.826–1.000)0.462 (0.039–0.886)
Two or more lesions
    VTS 1st vs VTS 2nd read1.0000.731 (0.448–1.000)
    CSSC 1st vs CSSC 2nd read0.846 (0.640–1.000)0.482 (−0.118–1.000)
Three or more lesions
    VTS 1st vs VTS 2nd read1.0000.774 (0.472–1.000)
    CSSC 1st vs CSSC 2nd read0.724 (0.361–1.000)0.482 (−0.118–1.000)
  • a Correlations demonstrated substantial intrareader agreement. The software generally outperformed conventional side-by-side comparison without, however, reaching statistical significance.