Most websites never achieved higher than a score of 3, with the possible exception of Question 14 (Appendix 1) which asked if there was information about more than one treatment choice, for which all websites achieve a 3 or above, simply because all sites discussed to some extent a number of treatment options.
A Youden Index Y = 1 was achieved with a cut-off score of 2.55, giving a sensitivity of 76% and a specificity of 75% (see also Table 4 and Figure 4).
Specificity and sensitivity clearly vary with the specific cut-off score chosen, with the highest magnitudes being achieved with a cut-off score of 13/14 (value "13" and lower are counted as negative and value "14" and higher as positive; sensitivity =.90, specificity =.79).
A good inter-rater reliability was achieved with an overall kappa score of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.60-0.94).
A good inter-rater reliability for diagnoses was achieved with an overall kappa score of 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.60 0.94) 58.
The best results achieved with a combination of 70% of the ML scores plus 30% of the TB scores: with this combination, on the 2012 benchmark, MRR improved from 0.45 to 0.47 (+4%, P < 0.01) and R20 from 0.56 to 0.58 (+3%, P < 0.01).
An average score of 87.8 was achieved with a standard deviation of 6.5.
Of the one in four who took matric maths in 2008, only 39% passed (despite a lowly passmark of just 30%), compared with 98% of whites; 28% of whites achieved a score of at least 80%, compared with just 2% of blacks.Not surprisingly, the same story is repeated at tertiary level.
Varga and Le reported that generated questions achieved a score of 2.45 (2.85) with respect to relevance and a score of 2.85 (3.1) with respect to syntactic correctness and fluency given a scale between from 1 to 4, with 1 being the best score.
The palpebral reflex scores differed markedly in time and between individuals, with some animals never achieving a score of 0. All animals under all sedative protocols used achieved a score of 2 before the end of immobilisation.
External validity (as adjudged by the Down and Black assessment tool) was poor, with the majority of studies achieving a score of 1.
