Comparison between Shimoyama’s classification and the simplified iATL-PI
| . | Shimoyama’s classification . | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smoldering type . | Favorable chronic type . | Unfavorable chronic type . | ||||
| n . | % . | n . | % . | n . | % . | |
| iATL-PI | ||||||
| Low risk | 42 | 35.6 | 8 | 18.6 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Intermediate risk | 67 | 56.8 | 30 | 69.8 | 42 | 39.6 |
| High risk | 9 | 7.6 | 5 | 11.6 | 63 | 59.4 |
| Total | 118 | 100.0 | 43 | 100.0 | 106 | 100.0 |
| . | Shimoyama’s classification . | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smoldering type . | Favorable chronic type . | Unfavorable chronic type . | ||||
| n . | % . | n . | % . | n . | % . | |
| iATL-PI | ||||||
| Low risk | 42 | 35.6 | 8 | 18.6 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Intermediate risk | 67 | 56.8 | 30 | 69.8 | 42 | 39.6 |
| High risk | 9 | 7.6 | 5 | 11.6 | 63 | 59.4 |
| Total | 118 | 100.0 | 43 | 100.0 | 106 | 100.0 |