Feasibility of MRI for the evaluation of interosseous ligament vertical segment via subtalar arthroscopy correlation: comparison of 2D and 3D MR images

Table 4 AUC values for the accuracy of IOLV evaluation for each reader and method in different sessions

	AUC	SE	95% CI	P value
1st session
Reader 1
Method 1	0.568	0.075	0.423–0.705
Method 2	0.679	0.067	0.535–0.802
Difference	0.111	0.076	−0.038-0.261	0.145
Reader 2
Method 1	0.636	0.071	0.491–0.765
Method 2	0.816	0.054	0.684–0.909
Difference	0.180	0.075	0.033–0.327	0.016
2nd session
Reader 1
Method 1	0.633	0.072	0.488–0.763
Method 2	0.700	0.068	0.557–0.819
Difference	0.067	0.064	−0.059-0.193	0.299
Reader 2
Method 1	0.647	0.07	0.503–0.779
Method 2	0.753	0.063	0.614–0.862
Difference	0.106	0.064	−0.020-0.232	0.099

Note. Data represent AUC values, standard errors, 95% confidence intervals for the diagnostic performance of each method, classified as intact or tear based on MRI grade using ROC curves. P-value represents the statistical significance of the differences between the two AUCs using methods 1 and 2, calculated using the DeLong test

ISSN: 1471-2474