Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of single-observer validation studies

From: Can you estimate body composition in dogs from photographs?

Method   vBCSmeasured vBCSsubjective vBCSadjusted
Versus BF% (Rs)   0.51 0.75 0.65
P < 0.001 P < 0.001 P < 0.001
Versus BCS actual (Kappa)   0.51 0.63 0.63
P < 0.001 P < 0.001 P < 0.001
Overall scoring accuracy Correct 83/125 (66 %) 35/51 (71 %) 90/125 (72 %)
Under 19/125 (15 %) 13/51 (25 %) 16/125 (13 %)
Over 23/125 (18 %) 2/51 (4 %) 19/125 (15 %)
Scoring accuracy (Ideal weight) Correct 16/24 (67 %) 13/14 (93 %) 19/24 (79 %)
Under n/a n/a n/a
Over 8/24 (33 %) 1/14 (7 %) 5/24 (21 %)
Scoring accuracy (Overweight) Correct 19/37 (51 %) 10/20 (50 %) 19/37 (51 %)
Under 3/37 (8 %) 9/20 (45 %) 4/37 (11 %)
Over 15/37 (41 %) 1/20 (5 %) 14/37 (38 %)
Scoring accuracy (Obese) Correct 48/64 (75 %) 13/17 (76 %) 52/64 (81 %)
Under 16/64 (25 %) 4/17 (24 %) 12/64 (19 %)
Over n/a n/a n/a
  1. The columns represent data for the three methods for visual body condition scoring (BCS) using photographs. vBCSmeasured: BCS based upon abdominal width to thoracic width ratio measured from a dorsal photograph; vBCSsubjective: BCS semi-quantitatively assessed from a non-standardised photograph using visual descriptors; vBCSadjusted: a refinement of vBCSmeasured, whereby the A:T ratio was first used to estimate BS, but the observer could then modify after examining standardised dorsal and lateral photographs and applying visual BCS descriptors. Rows represent results of performance of each method determined using different parameters. BF% (RS): correlation between vBCS method and body fat percentage using Spearman’s rank correlation; BCSactual Kappa: agreement between vBCS method and the actual BCS (9-integer unit system [5] determined by a single observer); Correct BCS assigned: proportion and percentage of dogs correctly scored using each vBCS method and the actual BCS