Skip to main content

Table 4 Results of multiple-observer validation

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

Method vBCSmeasured vBCSsubjective vBCSadjusted
Versus BF% (Rs) 0.64 (0.30–0.74) 0.74 (0.65–0.85) 0.70 (0.22–0.80)
P < 0.001 P < 0.001 P < 0.001
Versus BCS actual (Kappa) 0.70 (0.32–0.86) 0.55 (0.47–0.70) 0.70 (0.19–0.81)
P < 0.001 P < 0.001 P < 0.001
Correct BCS assigned 30 (19–35) 24 (22–29) 30 (20–33)
74 % (48–88 %) 60 % (55–72 %) 74 % (50–83 %)
  1. Results are expressed as median (range). The columns represent data for the three methods indirect 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 consensus between scores of two observers); Correct BCS assigned: proportion and percentage of dogs correctly scored using each vBCS method and the actual BCS