The phrase "agreement for comparison" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where you are discussing a formal arrangement or understanding that is intended to facilitate a comparison between two or more items, ideas, or situations.
Example: "We reached an agreement for comparison of the two proposals to determine which one best meets our needs."
Alternatives: "contract for evaluation" or "arrangement for analysis".
Based on kappa statistic, we found similar levels of agreement for comparisons between TOF measurements and clinical assessments in center 1 and center 2 (Additional file 2: Tables S2a S2i).
For the comparison of diary to tablet count adherence, 7% of participants were outside the limits of agreement; for the comparison of telephone to tablet count adherence, 5% of participants were outside the limits of agreement.
Good agreement for the comparison with both experimental data and ACI code is achieved.
This study shows acceptable bias but wide limits of agreement for the comparison of TVD, PVD and PPV between the automated CC system and skilled operators.
Median (25th to 75th) kappa coefficient was 0.68 (0.61 to 0.75) and ranged from 0.44 (reasonable agreement) to 0.78 (good agreement) for pairwise comparison of conventional scoring (n = 24 PSGs).
Agreement between the BIE readers and the on-site read was similar for two of the studies, and ranged from 0.82 (0.73 to 0.90) to 0.94 (0.87 to 1.01); for study PDT301, the agreement for this comparison was not as good, with κ ranging from 0.60 (0.51 to 0.69) to 0.68 (0.60 to 0.76).
Bland-Altman plots of difference in HbA1c values in WB and corrected capDBS (Fig. 1), and in WB and corrected venDBS (Fig. 2) showed good correlation and agreement between the two methods, with few samples falling outside the 95%% limits of agreement for each comparison (average difference ± 1.96 standard deviation of the difference).
The CAT-plot shows best agreement for FC/WAD-comparisons with CAT(r≈100)< 0.6 and worst for FC/t-shrinkage (CAT(r≈100)<0.2).
Furthermore, the reproducibility coefficient (RC) was calculated for intra-examiner comparisons and limits of agreement for inter-examiner comparisons.
Estimates and associated 95% CR of bias, B y, z ), together with estimates of the 95% limits of agreement for pair-wise comparisons of systolic blood pressure for each pair-wise comparison derived from both HB1 and HB2 are presented in Table 2. *Note: larger within subject covariance values are desirable.
