Expand this Topic clickable element to expand a topic
Skip to content
Optica Publishing Group

Reply to comment on “Scheimpflug and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the anterior segment: a comparative study”

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Abstract

We dispute the claim made by Dubbelman and colleagues [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22, 1216 (2005); this issue] that “incorrect statistical methods” were used to compare the MRI and Scheimpflug data. We clearly stated that we “analyzed the covariance of regression lines” in the results section. We believe the analysis of covariance of regression lines, as shown by Snedecor and Cochran [Statistical Methods (Iowa State U. Press, Ames, Iowa, 1989)] is as “correct” as the “straightforward statistical comparison” of confidence intervals employed by Dubbelman and colleagues; however; our statistical method has the benefit of being more precise and stringent than a simple comparison of confidence intervals.

© 2005 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article
More Like This
Comment on “Scheimpflug and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the anterior segment: a comparative study”

Michiel Dubbelman, Rob G.L. van der Heijde, and Henk A. Weeber
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(6) 1216-1218 (2005)

Scheimpflug and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of the anterior segment: a comparative study

Jane F. Koretz, Susan A. Strenk, Lawrence M. Strenk, and John L. Semmlow
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21(3) 346-354 (2004)

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Select as filters


Select Topics Cancel
© Copyright 2024 | Optica Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved