Sentence examples for both nomograms were assessed from inspiring English sources

The discrimination (Hanley and McNeil, 1982) and calibration accuracies of both nomograms were assessed.

The discrimination and calibration accuracy of the nomogram were assessed (Hanley and McNeil, 1982).

Using the external validation data set, the nomogram was assessed for discriminatory ability, and the predictions were assessed for calibration accuracy by plotting actual survival against predicted risk.

Finally, the LNM rate of groups previously identified as low risk by the nomogram was assessed in the development and validation cohorts.

The predictive value of the nomogram was assessed by means of calibration curves and discrimination ability through the area under the curve (AUC).

Using the validation data set, the nomogram was assessed for discriminatory ability by quantifying the concordance index (c-index), and the predictions were assessed for calibration accuracy by plotting actual survival against predicted risk.

Both groups were assessed twice.

Both were assessed technical fouls.

Both were assessed a technical foul.

We evaluated the discriminatory ability of the nomogram by quantifying the c-index, and the predictions were assessed for calibration accuracy by plotting actual survival against predicted risk using the external validation data set.

Calibration plots were generated to further validate the nomogram and this was assessed by grouping patients with respect to their nomogram-predicted probabilities and then comparing the mean of the actual observed KM estimate of 5-year CSS.