Measurement results and differences between different measurement techniques for each of the cups are listed in Table 3 (liner 4 was excluded from micrometer measurements as it was lost to follow-up).
The main difficulty with reliability of this information is that, while the two waveforms being compared are cardiac-driven, they are often measured differently (e.g., using different measurement techniques, or in different parts of the body) resulting in waveforms with different morphologies.
The results have shown that the differences obtained when using different measurement techniques and equipment are not of significant importance.
The average polyp size (as measured by the different measurement techniques) is displayed in Table 1.
Differences may also stem from different measurement techniques [patch clamp (47) vs. optical mapping (49)], use of calcium-sensitive dyes with different sensitivity, or use of uncouplers (such as BDM) that affect the L-type calcium channel (1, 31, 37).
The Bland and Altman method [27] was used to compare the results of the different measurement techniques, calculating the mean (bias) ± standard deviation (as a measure of precision) of the differences between the values obtained with each method.
Figure 4 shows the literature values for the CI of Avicel PH-101 categorized by the different measurement techniques, and it is obvious that the CI of cellulose measured by different methods produces different results.
Fifteen lateral radiographs of thoracic and lumbar fractures were selected and measured on two separate occasions by three spine surgeons using six different measurement techniques (centroid, Harrison posterior tangent method and 4 different types of modified Cobb method).
Fifty lateral radiographs of patients with single-level cervical degenerative disc were selected and measured on two separate occasions by three spine surgeons using three different measurement techniques.
Fifty lateral radiographs of cervical spine in flexion and extension were measured by three independent observers on two separate occasions using three different measurement techniques.
The sample size was determined on the hypothesis of an expected standard deviation of 8% for cardiac output values and an expected difference in the range of the standard deviation between the values of the different measurement techniques (α = 0.05 and power > 0.9).
