The phrase "at a given screening" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to a specific event or instance of a screening, such as a film or medical examination.
Example: "The results of the study were collected at a given screening of the film."
Alternatives: "during a specific screening" or "at a particular screening".
The rare prevalent cancer cases at a given screening round may, however, be at risk of being missed at any cut-off point.
Combining this with given STS parameters, we can calculate the probability that a tumor arising clinically at a given time without screening is found (earlier) at a given screening examination.
The risk of not detecting a small proportion of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III at a given screening round should thus be interpreted in the light of substantially diminished overdetection of harmless human papillomavirus infections in healthy women.
If the cut-off level was increased from ≥1 rlu/co to ≥10 rlu/co, up to 18 fewer women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III or higher per 100 000 screened women would be diagnosed and treated at the given screen in part of the Italian trials and in the Finnish trials.
Using the cut-off level ≥2 rlu/co instead of ≥1 rlu/co, up to 3% of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or higher and of grade III or higher detectable at cut-off level ≥1 rlu/co would not be detected at the given screen.
Up to 8% of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or higher and of grade III or higher would not be detected at the given screen if the cut-off levels ≥4 or ≥5 rlu/co were used, and up to 9% if the cut-off level ≥10 rlu/co was used.
Given a set of tumor growth parameters, we can calculate the probability that a tumor arising clinically at a given age without screening would have been in a given tumor size group some months earlier.
In the amperometric immunosensor, peroxidase catalyses the L2 formation in the presence of hydrogen peroxide and potassium iodide, and the reduction current intensity was measured at a given potential with screen-printed electrodes.
On either side of the stage, Guinness's official requirements for correct hug execution were displayed on giant screens: "At a given signal, each participant should squeeze the person on either side of them, holding the hug for a minimum of ten seconds".
All patients underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging during a parametric 'n-back' task, involving monitoring of dots in particular locations on a screen at a given delay from the original occurrence, twice: at baseline and 12 weeks post-rivastigmine/placebo treatment.
This result suggests that LIM activity inversely reflects the visual field extent occupied by the sum of the tested visual stimuli on the screen at a given time, rather than the size of a given object per se.
