Estimating the accuracy of muscle response testing: two randomised-order blinded studies

Table 2 The influence on various categorical participant characteristics on MRT Accuracy. (1) Practitioner profession, (2) Practitioner’s practising status, (3) Practitioner’s self-ranked MRT expertise,^c and (4) If the test patient reported guessing the paradigm

		MRT ACCURACY
		(1)		(2)			(3)			(4)
		Practitioner profession		Practitioner practising status			Self-ranked MRT experise			TP reported guessing the paradigm?
		Chiropractors	All others	Full Time	Part Time	Not Practising	4	3	1 or 2	Yes	No
		(n = 20)	c	(n = 26)	(n = 13)	(n = 7)	(n = 15)	(n = 19)	(n = 12)	(n = 21)	(n = 27)
Experiment 1	Mean	0.670	0.642	0.663	0.682	0.569	0.682	0.666	0.600	0.661	0.649
	95% CI	0.611 - 0.729	0.593 - 0.691	0.612 - 0.715	0.618 - 0.746	0.465 - 0.673	0.617 - 0.747	0.605 - 0.728	0.528 - 0.672	0.591 - 0.730	0.610 - 0.688
	p-value	0.45^a		0.13^b			0.35^b			0.38
Experiment 2		Chiropractors	All other	Full Time	Part Time	Not Practising	4	3	2	Yes	No
		(n = 14)	(n = 6)	(n = 14)	(n = 4)	(n = 2)	(n = 7)	(n = 10)	(n = 3)	(n = 6)	(n = 14)
	Mean	0.607	0.563	0.561	0.706	0.600	0.611	0.590	0.567	0.621	0.582
	95% CI	0.535 - 0.679	0.478 - 0.647	0.504 - 0.618	0.508 - 0.905	0.000 - 1.000	0.470 - 0.751	0.518 - 0.662	0.387 - 0.746	0.507 - 0.735	0.515 - 0.650
	p-value	0.36		0.07			0.86			0.49

MRT muscle response testing, CI confidence interval; ^a t-test result; ^bANOVA result; ^cPractitioners were asked to rank their own MRT ability from 0 (“None”) to 4 (“Expert”)

ISSN: 2662-7671