Reply to: “Agreement analysis” | Zendy

Hassan Hashemi | Zendy; Samira Heydarian | Zendy; Abbasali Yekta | Zendy; Mohamadreza Aghamirsalim | Zendy; Mahin Ahmadi-Pishkuhi | Zendy; Mehrnaz Valadkhan | Zendy; Hadi Ostadimoghaddam | Zendy; Ahmad Ahmadzadeh Amiri | Zendy; Mehdi Khabazkhoob | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Open Access

Reply to: “Agreement analysis”

Author(s) -

Hassan Hashemi,

Samira Heydarian,

Abbasali Yekta,

Mohamadreza Aghamirsalim,

Mahin Ahmadi-Pishkuhi,

Mehrnaz Valadkhan,

Hadi Ostadimoghaddam,

Ahmad Ahmadzadeh Amiri,

Mehdi Khabazkhoob

Publication year - 2020

Publication title -

journal of optometry

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 0.844

H-Index - 25

eISSN - 1888-4296

pISSN - 1989-1342

DOI - 10.1016/j.optom.2020.05.002

Subject(s) - medicine

Thank you for reading the article. The objective of this study was not to show agreement through reporting the Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Generally, agreement is not a point when there is a weak correlation, and a strong correlation dies not indicate agreement. Sometimes there is a strong correlation but there is a difference between two devices. The presence of a strong correlation yet a large difference indicates bias, which can be overcome through calibration. ICC is mostly used for repeatability and is less commonly used for agreement. Of course, some studies have used ICC for agreement, which is not correct.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research