Materials 2025 , 18 , 228
7of 17
Table4. Corresponding positions (ranks) of the 29 tested tissue products obtained for the 4 considered assessment methods.
Ranks
Product ID
TSA
SUB
KES
OPT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
13
2 6 1 5 8 4 3
2 6 1 4 3 7 8
T22 T14 T15 T09 T08 T12 T07 T04 T23 T16 T20 T21 T18 T19 T13 T03 T27 T26 T06 T24 T01 T05 T28 T11 T02 T25 T17 T10 T29
7
20
3 8 1
11
10
6
10 19 25 13 12 27 15 18 28 14 16 23 17 11 22 7 24 21 29 20 26 9
16 17
24 17 28 25 26 27 14 22 12 20 23 21 5 9 13 10 19 16 29 15 18
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
9 5
23 11 14 12 19 21 25 26 18 29 15 22 27 24 2
4
28
Through the observation of Figure 3, deviations are seen on the bars across the entire graph, meaning that the methods differ on the given evaluations to the tested tissue products. Ideally, if the methods were indeed 100% concordant, all the bars (black, red, orange, and yellow) should have been represented in the graph in an increasing way, but this was only verified for our reference, the TSA method (black bars). In the graph, it can also be seen that there are cases on which high differences can be detected between two or even more methods, for example, in the cases of the tissue products T15 and T10 (green arrows), meaning that they totally disagree. On the other hand, there are also other cases that can be observed on the graph on which the four methods presented very similar results when compared to each other, such as in the cases of the tissue products T09 and T17 (blue arrows), meaning that there is an agreement between the methods on these cases. Continuing the process of comparison between methods, let us now determine the differences verified between the methods two at a time, namely, TSA versus SUB, TSA versus KES, TSA versus OPT, SUB versus KES, SUB versus OPT, and, finally, KES ver- sus OPT. The reference on all the above comparisons corresponds to the first of the two considered methods on each comparison and defines the arrangement of the 29 tis- sue products from the rougher to the softer. The differences obtained in this process are presented in Table 5, and Figure 4 in graphical form. Table 5 also presents, on the bottom, the average and the standard deviation values that were calculated for the 29 tested tissue products, on the six considered comparisons.
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator