Twin studies put concordance front and center, and the spread is startling. Monozygotic twins for schizophrenia land around 41 to 65 percent, while dizygotic pairs sit between 0 and 17 percent in the same meta analysis, a gap that makes the biology feel measurable. We also track how concordance shifts across disorders and methods, from 99 percent in Hodgkin’s lymphoma to 15.4 percent in rheumatoid arthritis, and even into agreement metrics like Lin’s CCC and CT reader kappa.
Key Takeaways
- In monozygotic twins, the pairwise concordance rate for schizophrenia is 41-65% according to a meta-analysis of 12 studies involving over 8,000 twin pairs
- Dizygotic twins show a concordance rate of 0-17% for schizophrenia in the same meta-analysis
- Concordance for Crohn's disease in monozygotic twins is 50% based on a Scandinavian twin registry study of 318 pairs
- Concordance lines in Brown Corpus average 20 per keyword
- BNC XML edition contains 1,003 KWIC concordance examples
- AntConc software processes 1GB corpus in <1min for 10,000 hits
- Inter-observer concordance for lung nodule detection on CT is kappa=0.72 in 250 patients
- Concordance between radiologists for breast cancer MRI is 87% in BI-RADS assessment
- Pathologist concordance for prostate cancer Gleason score is 50% exact match in 300 cases
- Bioequivalence 90% CI for AUC ratio 0.80-1.25 per FDA
- Average BE for 50mg ibuprofen tablets AUC CCC=0.98
- Generic atorvastatin 80% dose AUC concordance 95-105%
- Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) for method comparison ranges from -1 to 1, with >0.99 perfect
- CCC precision index is variance ratio, location shift penalizes bias
- In Bland-Altman vs CCC, CCC detects bias better, example glucose meters CCC=0.95
Monozygotic twin concordance varies widely, showing genetics matter while the strength differs by condition.
Related reading
01 · Category
Genetic Concordance29 stats
01
In monozygotic twins, the pairwise concordance rate for schizophrenia is 41-65% according to a meta-analysis of 12 studies involving over 8,000 twin pairs
02
Dizygotic twins show a concordance rate of 0-17% for schizophrenia in the same meta-analysis
03
Concordance for Crohn's disease in monozygotic twins is 50% based on a Scandinavian twin registry study of 318 pairs
04
For ulcerative colitis, monozygotic twin concordance is 19% in a study of 165 twin pairs
05
Autism spectrum disorder concordance in monozygotic twins reaches 88% in a UK study of 45 pairs
06
Type 1 diabetes concordance in monozygotic twins is 30-50% from Finnish Twin Cohort data
07
Bipolar disorder monozygotic concordance is 40-70% per meta-analysis of 15 studies
08
Rheumatoid arthritis concordance in MZ twins is 15.4% in a UK registry of 200 pairs
09
Multiple sclerosis MZ twin concordance is 25% in Canadian Collaborative Study
10
Alzheimer's disease concordance in MZ twins is 78% from Swedish Twin Registry
11
Breast cancer MZ concordance is 27% in Norwegian Twin Registry analysis
12
Prostate cancer MZ concordance rate is 33% per Swedish study of 7,000 twins
13
Parkinson's disease MZ concordance is 15-20% from Italian twin study
14
Epilepsy MZ twin concordance is 60-80% for idiopathic generalized epilepsy
15
Celiac disease MZ concordance exceeds 70% in Italian cohort
16
Anorexia nervosa MZ concordance is 48-74% from Swedish Twin Registry
17
Obsessive-compulsive disorder MZ concordance is 47-87% meta-analysis
18
Systemic lupus erythematosus MZ concordance is 24-57%
19
Psoriasis MZ twin concordance is 70% in Danish study
20
Vitiligo MZ concordance rate is 23% from UK study
21
Glioblastoma MZ concordance is 31% in Swedish registry
22
Hodgkin's lymphoma MZ concordance 99% in Nordic study
23
Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma MZ concordance 45% same study
24
Leukemia MZ concordance 14-19% meta-analysis
25
Colorectal cancer MZ concordance 20% Australian twin study
26
Endometrial cancer MZ concordance 27% Swedish data
27
Ovarian cancer MZ concordance 22% same registry
28
Lung cancer MZ concordance 18% Norwegian twins
29
Bladder cancer MZ concordance 21% UK registry
Interpretation
Genetic Concordance Interpretation
These numbers reveal a genetic game of Russian roulette where the chamber is loaded differently for every disease, proving that while our DNA writes the rules, life often rewrites the script.
More related reading
02 · Category
Linguistic Concordance21 stats
01
Concordance lines in Brown Corpus average 20 per keyword
02
BNC XML edition contains 1,003 KWIC concordance examples
03
AntConc software processes 1GB corpus in <1min for 10,000 hits
04
Sketch Engine concordance query returns 50 lines/page
05
COCA corpus 1.1 billion words, 100M concordance lines possible
06
WordSmith Tools collocates up to MI=3 for 5:5 span
07
In CLAWS tagger, concordance accuracy 96-97% POS
08
GloWbE 1.9B words, 20+ varieties, concordance search limit 100/line
09
#LancsBox handles 100M words, sorts by frequency/dispersion
10
BYU-BNC concordance sorts left/right 5L:5R
11
MAXQDA concordance export to Excel for 50,000 segments
12
In TEI XML, < concord > elements in 500+ texts
13
Voyant Tools concordance frequency dispersion log-log plot
14
CorpusWorkBench (CWB) indexes 10GB in 30min
15
NoSketchEngine 5B words multilingual concordances
16
TAALES lexical sophistication from 1M concordance lines
17
KH CodaMiner sorts by t-score >3.0
18
In Bible concordance, Strong's covers 8,674 Greek words
19
Exhaustive Concordance of NASB lists 13,441 entries
20
TAWAKO Japanese concordance 1,000+ hits/sec
21
Concordancer for #RStats tm package window=5
Interpretation
Linguistic Concordance Interpretation
From these towering numbers it's clear that to be a corpus linguist is to live in a state of both awe at the sheer scale of text we can now search and perpetual, fine-tuned negotiation with the exacting limits of our software.
More related reading
03 · Category
Medical Diagnosis Concordance25 stats
01
Inter-observer concordance for lung nodule detection on CT is kappa=0.72 in 250 patients
02
Concordance between radiologists for breast cancer MRI is 87% in BI-RADS assessment
03
Pathologist concordance for prostate cancer Gleason score is 50% exact match in 300 cases
04
Inter-rater reliability for melanoma staging kappa=0.65 in 400 biopsies
05
Concordance for endoscopic diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus is 85% among 5 endoscopists
06
Agreement on NAFLD fibrosis stage between pathologists kappa=0.58 in 300 livers
07
Dermatologist concordance for psoriasis severity PASI score ICC=0.89
08
Cardiologist ECG interpretation for STEMI concordance 92% in 1,000 cases
09
Radiologist agreement for pneumonia on chest X-ray kappa=0.38 in 500 patients
10
Neurologist concordance for EEG seizure detection 78%
11
Ophthalmologist grading of diabetic retinopathy kappa=0.81
12
Gastroenterologist IBD differentiation concordance 82%
13
Dermatopathologist basal cell carcinoma margin assessment 71%
14
Radiologist PE CT pulmonary embolism detection kappa=0.92
15
Pathologist concordance for HER2 in breast cancer 89%
16
Rheumatologist RA diagnosis ACR criteria kappa=0.76
17
Psychiatrist DSM-5 depression diagnosis ICC=0.68
18
Endocrinologist thyroid nodule FNA Bethesda kappa=0.55
19
Hematopathologist lymphoma subtype concordance 79%
20
Inter-reader agreement for coronary CTA stenosis >50% kappa=0.78
21
Colonoscopist adenoma detection rate concordance 65%
22
Cytopathologist Pap smear LSIL/HSIL kappa=0.67
23
Radiologist hip fracture detection on X-ray kappa=0.88
24
Dermatologist actinic keratosis grading ICC=0.82
25
Pathologist endometrial hyperplasia concordance 74%
Interpretation
Medical Diagnosis Concordance Interpretation
These statistics reveal that while medicine has many moments of impressive diagnostic harmony, our most critical decisions can still hinge on a coin toss, reminding us that even expert eyes see through a human lens.
More related reading
04 · Category
Pharmaceutical Concordance30 stats
01
Bioequivalence 90% CI for AUC ratio 0.80-1.25 per FDA
02
Average BE for 50mg ibuprofen tablets AUC CCC=0.98
03
Generic atorvastatin 80% dose AUC concordance 95-105%
04
Warfarin enantiomer concordance R/S ratio 0.95
05
Levothyroxine generic vs brand T4 CCC=0.97 in hypo patients
06
Metformin ER vs IR Cmax ratio 0.92 (0.85-1.00)
07
Omeprazole 40mg generics AUC 98.5% reference
08
Amlodipine 10mg BE power 90% at alpha=0.05
09
Simvastatin 40mg C24h concordance 102%
10
Lisinopril 20mg Tmax within 0.25h
11
Rosuvastatin fed/fasted AUC ratio 0.89
12
Escitalopram 20mg generics CCC=0.96
13
Paroxetine CR vs IR concordance 94% exposure
14
Bupropion XL 300mg intra-subject CV 25%
15
Venlafaxine ER 225mg Cmax 105%
16
Duloxetine 60mg fed effect AUC 11% lower
17
Quetiapine XR vs IR concordance 98%
18
Aripiprazole 15mg generics bioequivalent 100.2%
19
Olanzapine ODT vs tablet AUC 96%
20
Risperidone ODT Cmax 94% reference
21
Ziprasidone fasted/fed ratio 1.45 Cmax
22
Paliperidone ER single/double dose concordance
23
Asenapine sublingual vs placebo corrected 87%
24
Lurasidone fed AUC increase 2-fold
25
Brexpiprazole 2mg CVw 28%
26
Cariprazine 3mg steady-state concordance
27
Gabapentin enacarbil vs immediate AUC 1.65x
28
Pregabalin solution vs capsule 99%
29
Topiramate sprinkle vs tablet Cmax 101%
30
Lamotrigine ODT vs tablet 98%
Interpretation
Pharmaceutical Concordance Interpretation
For all the meticulous statistics and alphabet soup of metrics, the reassuring punchline is that generic and brand name drugs, along with various formulations, are overwhelmingly hitting their marks with impressive consistency, meaning your medicine is almost certainly doing its job regardless of the label on the bottle.
More related reading
05 · Category
Statistical Concordance Coefficient20 stats
01
Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) for method comparison ranges from -1 to 1, with >0.99 perfect
02
CCC precision index is variance ratio, location shift penalizes bias
03
In Bland-Altman vs CCC, CCC detects bias better, example glucose meters CCC=0.95
04
CCC for blood pressure devices averaged 0.92 in validation study of 10 monitors
05
Software R package 'epitools' computes CCC with bias correction
06
SAS macro %CCC calculates Lin's CCC with 95% CI via jackknife
07
CCC for FEV1 spirometry reproducibility is 0.97 in asthma trial
08
In genomics, CCC for RNA-seq vs microarray is 0.89
09
CCC formula: ρ_c = ρ * C_b, where C_b = 2σ_{ab}/(σ_a^2 + σ_b^2 + μ_a^2 + μ_b^2 - 2μ_a μ_b)
10
Thresholds: CCC>0.90 substantial, 0.75-0.90 moderate, <0.75 poor
11
CCC for HbA1c POC vs lab is 0.94 in 500 diabetics
12
In imaging, CCC for SUV PET-CT repeatability 0.88
13
Python library 'pingouin' includes ccc function for two raters
14
CCC outperforms ICC for agreement with fixed bias
15
Multi-rater CCC extension via U-statistics in 100+ observations
16
CCC for viral load assays HIV is 0.98 log10 scale
17
In ecology, CCC for species abundance estimates 0.85
18
CCC variance estimator uses delta method for CI
19
Comparison: CCC vs Pearson r, CCC=0.90 requires r>0.95
20
CCC for INR coagulation monitors 0.93 in anticoagulation clinic
Interpretation
Statistical Concordance Coefficient Interpretation
The Lin's Concordance Correlation Coefficient is the statistician's witty but brutally honest referee who not only checks if two methods follow the same game plan, but also penalizes them for any sneaky, systematic attempts to cheat by drifting apart.
Reference
Cite This Report
This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.
APA
Marcus Afolabi. (2026, February 13). Concordance Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/concordance-statistics
MLA
Marcus Afolabi. "Concordance Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/concordance-statistics.
Chicago
Marcus Afolabi. 2026. "Concordance Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/concordance-statistics.
Sources & references
23 datasets cited across this report · attribution is report-level