Reply to: “Agreement analysis”

Hashemi, Hassan; Heydarian, Samira; Yekta, Abbas Ali; Aghamirsalim, Mohamadreza; Ahmadi-Pishkuhi, Mahin; Valadkhan, Mehrnaz; Ostadimoghaddam, Hadi; Amiri, Ahmad Ahmadzadeh; Khabazkhoob, Mehdi

doi:10.1016/j.optom.2020.05.002

Journal of Optometry

ISSN: 1888-4296

The Journal of Optometry (J Optom) is the scientific double blind peer-reviewed publication of the Spanish General Council of Optometry (www.cgcoo.es). Audience of J Optom includes optometrists, ophthalmologists and visual scientists, other professionals and researchers with interests in vision and the eye as well as undergraduate and post-graduate students in those fields. The J Optom welcomes the submission of original manuscripts, reviews, case reports and scientific letters describing clinical and experimental research in all fields related with the eye and vision. Journal of Optometry is an open access journal that publishes articles in English.

Indexed in:

Web of Science, Clarivate Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) Pubmed/Medline, Pubmed/Pubmed Central, Índice Bibliográfico Español en Ciencias de la Salud, CrossRef, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Index Copernicus, National Library of Medicine Catalog (NLM Catalog), SCImago Journal Rank, Google Scholar and Scopus

Thank you for reading the article. The objective of this study was not to show agreement through reporting the Pearson's correlation coefficient. Generally, agreement is not a point when there is a weak correlation, and a strong correlation dies not indicate agreement. Sometimes there is a strong correlation but there is a difference between two devices. The presence of a strong correlation yet a large difference indicates bias, which can be overcome through calibration. ICC is mostly used for repeatability and is less commonly used for agreement. Of course, some studies have used ICC for agreement, which is not correct.