Materials 2025 , 18 , 228
9of 17
comparison between both these most concordant methods to be used at the continuation for the analysis of three case studies of interest.
Table 5. Rank differences obtained in the comparison between assessment methods for the 29 tested tissue products.
Rank Differences Between Approaches Product ID TSA vs. SUB TSA vs. KES TSA vs. OPT SUB vs. KES SUB vs. OPT KES vs. OPT T22 +12 +1 +1 +3 +10 0 T14 +5 +4 +4 +9 +19 0 T15 +17 − 2 − 2 +2 +1 +4 T09 − 1 +1 0 +16 +11 +7 T08 +3 +3 − 2 +7 +20 − 1 T12 − 5 − 2 +5 +4 +2 0 T07 +3 − 4 0 − 1 − 1 − 2 T04 − 2 +2 0 0 − 5 − 5 T23 +7 +10 +15 +4 +19 +1 T16 +7 +15 +7 − 7 − 3 − 2 T20 − 2 +2 +17 +4 +16 +10 T21 − 7 0 +13 +6 +2 +13 T18 +10 +14 +13 − 11 − 11 +15 T19 − 3 +1 +13 − 7 − 9 − 5 T13 − 1 − 8 − 10 − 6 − 5 +12 T03 − 4 +2 − 2 +3 +8 − 4 T27 +2 +11 +5 +8 0 +6 T26 +3 − 4 − 9 − 1 +5 − 4 T06 +6 − 3 − 7 +9 +3 +5 T24 +6 +3 0 − 19 − 19 − 5 T01 − 3 − 4 +2 − 7 − 12 − 5 T05 − 20 − 11 − 1 +2 − 3 − 9 T28 +6 − 1 − 10 +4 +3 − 3 T11 − 9 − 15 − 14 +5 +5 − 5 T02 − 3 − 1 − 6 − 9 − 13 − 8 T25 +1 − 5 − 10 − 3 − 6 − 8 T17 − 3 +2 +2 − 6 − 11 − 1 T10 − 24 − 8 − 13 − 2 − 10 − 6 T29 − 1 − 3 − 11 − 7 − 16 0 Average 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Standard Deviation 8.4 6.7 8.7 7.4 10.7 6.5
Table6. Main results of the comparison between the KES and OPT methods.
Product ID (Order Based on KES)
KES Rank
OPT Rank
Differences (KES vs. OPT)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 2 7 4 6 5 3
0 0
T15 T22 T07 T12 T09 T14 T13 T08 T11 T04 T05
+4 +7 − 1 0 − 2 − 5 +1 − 2 +10
11
10
10 11
8
21
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator