Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
The phrase "achieved a sensitivity" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts where one is discussing the attainment of a certain level of sensitivity, often in scientific, medical, or analytical discussions.
Example: "The researchers achieved a sensitivity of 95% in their diagnostic test, allowing for more accurate results."
Alternatives: "reached a sensitivity" or "attained a sensitivity".
Exact(60)
This method achieved a sensitivity of 100% and a false detection rate of 0.16/h.
Ma found that after a 5-min briefing, seven residents achieved a sensitivity of 97 % and specificity of 100%% on cadaver models [21].
This method was applied on 21 patients from Freiburg database, and it achieved a sensitivity of 75.8% and an average false-alarm prediction rate of 0.09/h.
A cut point of 20percentt achieved a sensitivity and negative predictive value of 100percentt for MACE with a specificity of 21%.
The device achieved a sensitivity of 7.1 cps/ kBq/mL) and a minimum detectable activity of 2.5 kBq/ml for 18F.
It achieved a sensitivity of 88.34%, a false prediction rate of 0.155 h-1, and an average prediction time of 22.5 min.
A dichotomous cut point was chosen as the ACI-TIPI score that achieved a sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) of 100%.
The biomarker slope model achieved a sensitivity of 58%% and specificity of 93%% (LR+: 8.8, LR-: 0.45) and was well calibrated (Fig. 2c).
However, due to the intrinsic limitations of the polymerase, we only achieved a sensitivity of 10,000 target molecules, which is insufficient for most practical uses.
The proposed technique achieved a sensitivity of 87% and an average false detection rate of 27.1 CMBs per subject on the "possible and definite" set.
In a 10 fold-cross validation it achieved a sensitivity of 85.7%, a specificity of 80.5%, a PPV of 67.7%, a NPV of 92.2% and MCC of 0.63; in independent testing it achieved a sensitivity of 67.7%, a specificity of 78.8%, a PPV of 57.6%, a NPV of 85.2% and MCC of 0.45.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com