deletions | additions       diff --git a/Caramanos_2010_looked_specifically_at__.tex b/Caramanos_2010_looked_specifically_at__.tex  index 734390b..557eb42 100644  --- a/Caramanos_2010_looked_specifically_at__.tex  +++ b/Caramanos_2010_looked_specifically_at__.tex 
...
Caramanos 2010 looked specifically at repositioning in relation to SIENA, which is a  longitudinal analysis, but one could assume that repositioning affected the scan-rescan variability of some ROIs in our cross-sectional analysis. We are assuming have assumed  that the consistency of positioning varies between sites, becausewe did not define  a standardized positioning protocol. protocol was not defined.  A big reason for this is because we want was  to be able to incorporate data that was previously acquired for future studies.In the scaling factor derivation, we take the average of the two volumes to calibrate, and calculate an "overall" bias.  Wedo  have some measure of positioning consistency that is was  reflected in the amount of variability due to the site-by-run interaction term in our ICC calculation, since variability in positioning will certainly would  contribute to the variability of volumes between runs at particular sites. This variance component is was  much smaller than the variance due to subjects/sites/subjects x site/unexplained, and the specific variance component for run is runxsite was  reported for each ROI in the supplemental materials. Overall, the majority of the variance is was  explained by subject, site, and the subjectxsite interaction than by the site by run term.