Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
*Predicted outcome, classification cut off >0.1.
Similar(59)
Table 1 WHO BMI Classification (WHO 2004) Classification Cut-off point Underweight <18.5 Normal weight 18.5 24.9 Overweight 25.0 29.9 Obesity Class I 30.0 34.9 Obesity Class II 35.0 39.9 Obesity Class III ≥40.0.
In effect we have translated the WHO BMI thresholds into FMI equivalent values by matching the prevalences of the two indices at each classification cut-off point.
The classification cut-off was 0.5 and the maximum number of iterations was 20.
Classification cut-off values of individual biomarkers were determined on the basis of their sensitivity values in the training set.
The AUC analysis thus confirmed that the suppression-induced reduction in individual detection rates was not dependent on arbitrary classification cut-off points.
This issue can alternatively be addressed indirectly by changing the (usual default) classification cut-off point from 0.50 to (say) ps = sample prevalence of dyslipidemia, and (in effect) classifying an individual as dyslipidemic only if their model-estimated posterior probability of being dyslipidemic exceeds their prior probability of being dyslipidemic (i.e., ps).
In fact, when the iris shows scores above the classification cut-offs, these are almost every time accompanied by corneal opacity scores also above the classification cut-offs.
†Body Mass Index categories were based on WHO classification cut-offs: underweight and normal weight (≤24.99 kg/m), overweight (25.0 29.99 kg/m), obese (≥30.00 kg/m); Fruit/Vegetable Consumption based on 2007 guidelines and dependent upon age and gender.
This first epidemiological study of obesity prevalence in school children and adolescents showed that 11.4% of Bucharest's children and adolescents were obese by WHO classification, 6.1% by IOTF cut off values and 10% by CDC classification.
In this paper we have also not used a SUVmax cut off for the classification of malignancy because any cut off value is arbitrary and certainly an optimal diagnostic threshold has not been defined for modern time-of-flight scanners or using respiratory gating to date.
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