Paper detail

Beyond Point Estimates: Toward Proper Statistical Inferencing and Reporting of Intraclass Correlation Coefficients

Reporting test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) has received increasing attention due to the criticisms of poor transparency and replicability in neuroimaging research, as well as many other biomedical studies. Numerous studies have thus evaluated the reliability of their findings by comparing ICCs, however, they often failed to test statistical differences between ICCs or report confidence intervals. Relying solely on point estimates may preclude valid inference about population-level differences and compromise the reliability of conclusions. To address this issue, this study systematically reviewed the use of ICC in articles published in NeuroImage from 2022 to 2024, highlighting the prevalence of misreporting and misuse of ICCs. We further provide practical guidelines for conducting appropriate statistical inference on ICCs. For practitioners in this area, we introduce an online application for statistical testing and sample size estimation when utilizing ICCs. We recalculated confidence intervals and formally tested ICC values reported in the reviewed articles, thereby reassessing the original inferences. Our results demonstrate that exclusive reliance on point estimates could lead to unreliable or even misleading conclusions. Specifically, only two of the eleven reviewed articles provided unequivocally valid statistical inferences based on ICCs, whereas two articles failed to yield any valid inference at all, raising serious concerns about the replicability of findings in this field. These results underscore the urgent need for rigorous inferential frameworks when reporting and interpreting ICCs.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.