Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) ) 1naresh

Array
(
    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
        (
            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
            [type] => guest
            [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
            [access-type] => Controlled
            [privilege] => Array
                (
                    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
                        (
                            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
                            [type] => privilege-set
                            [privilege-set] => GUEST
                        )

                )

            [credentials] => Array
                (
                    [method] => guest
                )

        )

)

Table 2. Advantages and disadvantages of singular and combinations of radiographic measurements to evaluate cSDH progression
Advantage Disadvantage
Width Simple, practical, good external applicability, sensitivity easy to adjust (2 vs 5 mm, and so forth) Too dependent on measurement technique and location, sensitivity might be low
Volume Intuitively the right choice, presumably most accurate Labor intensive, unlikely to be used in day-to-day practice
Volume + width Raises the bar for specificity More challenging to interpret, 2 thresholds to define
Less sensitive
Volume + width + MLS Raises the bar for specificity even further Even more challenging to interpret, definition issues, 2 df (>2 mm and > 2 mm and > 20 mL)
Low sensitivity

	Advantage	Disadvantage
Width	Simple, practical, good external applicability, sensitivity easy to adjust (2 vs 5 mm, and so forth)	Too dependent on measurement technique and location, sensitivity might be low
Volume	Intuitively the right choice, presumably most accurate	Labor intensive, unlikely to be used in day-to-day practice
Volume + width	Raises the bar for specificity	More challenging to interpret, 2 thresholds to define
		Less sensitive
Volume + width + MLS	Raises the bar for specificity even further	Even more challenging to interpret, definition issues, 2 df (>2 mm and > 2 mm and > 20 mL)
		Low sensitivity