Skip to main content

Table 1 Descriptive data and statistical analyses of the study population and of subgroups

From: A new method for estimating patient body weight using CT dose modulation data

  Study population PMI ≥ 4 days PMI < 4 days Women Men Implants No implants
Number of cases 329 89 240 78 162 38 202
Female 105 27 78 78 0 17 61
Male 224 62 162 0 162 21 141
Minimum age 18 22 18 21 18 21 18
Maximum age 95 95 94 94 94 94 94
Mean age 59.0 61.3 58.1 62.0 56.3 69.0 56.1
SDa (±) 18.0 15.8 18.6 18.0 18.7 17.2 18.2
Minimum weight 18 18 32 32 34 34 32
Maximum weight 137 122 137 131 137 120 137
Mean weight 73.8 67.4 76.2 68.4 80.0 75.0 76.4
SDa (±) 20.1 21.0 19.3 20.9 17.2 20.0 19.1
Minimum mAseff 30 30 67 75 67 67 75
Maximum mAseff 294 250 294 294 294 281 294
Mean mAseff 165.8 143.6 174.0 160.5 180.5 174.0 174.0
SDa (±) 46.4 47.3 43.3 48.3 39.0 45.4 42.9
Pearson’s r b 0.931 0.854 0.966 0.974 0.960 0.969 0.966
p valuec <0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001
  1. The study population indicated a strong correlation between measured BW and mAseff values (r = 0.931). The Pearson coefficient was higher for PMI < 4 days (r = 0.966) than for PMI ≥ 4 days (r = 0.854); r was 0.974 for females with PMI < 4 days and 0.960 for males with PMI < 4 days. Further subgroups with PMI < 4 days for implants (r = 0.969) and no implants (r = 0.966) revealed both strong and nearly equal correlations. All correlation coefficients were statistically significant (p < 0.001)
  2. aStandard deviation
  3. bPearson correlation coefficient between mAseff and body weight
  4. c p value of the correlation