We chose a score of 4 or higher as the relevant cut-off [ 29] for the selection of patients that should be visited for a comprehensive geriatric assessment.
We chose a score of at least 22 to ensure that a factor is selected if at least two FGDs indicated it as "very important" and the reaming four FGDS indicated it as "important".
A score of 75 indicates that 50% of respondents have no difficulty reading small print, 48 – watching TV and seeing steps, 36 – recognizing people when they are close, etc. Obviously, the authors could have chosen a score at which any other proportion of respondents has no difficulty performing a given task, but using a cut-off of 50% simplifies interpretation because it implies a 1 to 1 chance.
In screening depression in pregnancy, researchers chose a score greater than 9 and 43% of their population scored above this cutoff.
The minimal cut-off for the search was chosen at a score of 0. The choice of this rather low threshold permits the detection of all ZFs/ZFPs, but also results in the detection of many false-positives.
Since It has been shown that the bit scores in BLAST result are more explanatory than e-values [34], due to the fact that the e-value depends on the size of the database used, we chose a bit score of 100 as the cut-off value for blast results when any of the small databases (described above) were used.
We chose a cutoff score of 0.9, a commonly used cutoff in MS/MS experiments [22], for both tools.
We chose a disability score of ≥2/5 on the 5-point scale used in the development sample, 41 or ≥7/24 on the 24-point Roland Morris Disability scale used in the validation sample.
The thresholds for defining a putative mutation as somatic we attempted to set to be as equivalent as possible between programs, and thus chose a somatic score of greater than 40 for SomaticSniper, and a joint genotype probability (p_AA_AB | p_AA_BB) of greater than 0.9999 for JointSNVMix2.
We chose to add a score of -3 in case of deterioration.
Early approaches to gene list interpretation relied on choosing a handful of high scoring genes, and then building rather subjective, anecdotal interpretations.
