For reader and writer alike, they pose less risk.
For Reader, that kind of sacrifice would clearly be too much.
For reader convenience, Table 1 provides a list of symbols and mathematical notations.
For reader 2 these figures were 0.87, 84%and74%4%.
For reader A, the strength of agreement ranged from substantial (κ = .77) to almost perfect (κ = .96) and for reader B also from substantial (κ = .75) to almost perfect (κ = .91).91
For Reader 1 data, there was some evidence suggesting a greater increase in cartilage scores in the RA group compared with controls (P = 0.067) and for Reader 2 data, the difference reached significance (P = 0.038).
For reader 3, AUC improved from 0.58 on standard MRI to 0.78 after addition of DWI (P = 0.002).
For reader 2, the ICC values were 0.913 for baseline radiographs and 0.931 for year-2 radiographs.
For reader 2, AUC improved from 0.87 on standard MRI to 0.91 after addition of DWI (p = 0.09).
Adobe initially charged for Reader, and with few Readers there were few reasons to buy Acrobat.
