求大佬帮忙看一下这段话，作者是先用eta squared value去做事后效能计算？（我查资料说是eta square是非参值指标），然后再用ICC做样本量估计？临床小白属实给我整蒙了。

The eta­ squared value for three methods was 0.0489, and the effect size was calculated as 0.2267469 using this eta­squared value with an α error set at 5%. Based on these calculations, the post hoc power was calculated as 0.9649628 with a β error over 80%. The secondary outcome measure was the intraclass correlations (ICCs) for reliability17). With a two­sided α error of 5% and β error of 20%, sample size calculation was performed. The acceptable ICC value for reliability between radiography and navigation was set as 0.9, and the expected ICC value was set as 0.95 to evaluate the ICC values conservatively. Based on these calculations, the required sample size was 49 for each method.

本人最近投了一篇SCI，是分析两种检查方法（连续变量）的关系，先做了一次kappa分析（两种方法都可以分成轻中重三组），然后做了2种检查方法间的相关性和bland altman分析。最后再按其中一种检查方法将其分成轻重中3组，分别比较两种方法间的相关性和ICC，审稿人表示“I also did not see a power analysis to justify the sample size used for the study”,请问我应该怎么回复，是在正文中补充power analysis嘛，是着重整体的power analysis还是分组后的，还有那个effect size该取多大，求教各位老师！不甚感激！