"classification ranges from" is a correct and usable phrase in written English.
You can use it when talking about two or more distinct divisions, categories, or levels that something can be classified into. For example, "Classification of clinical trials ranges from phase 1 to phase 4."
Accuracy of the classification ranges from 87 to 92 % indicating consistent classification results.
Kappa coefficient obtained from the classification, ranges from 89.17 to 92.68 %.
Furthermore, in controlled studies, the ability of inflammatory bowel disease experts to similarly identify the disease phenotypes, using the Vienna classification, ranges from poor to fair.
However, a universal definition of disturbance is debatable, as its classification ranges from abiotic to biotic or natural to anthropogenic [47], [48].
The total time required for preprocessing voice data for classification ranges from slightly less than an hour to four hours and eighteen minutes, depending on the choice of preprocessing algorithms and complexity of the datasets.
The relationship between iFR and FFR has been extensively evaluated in more than 2,000 stenoses, 1 4 and their agreement in lesion classification ranges from 80%to90%0%, depending on whether the comparison is made in clinical populations, with predominantly intermediate lesions, or in samples with more severe stenoses.
For the medical immediacy framework, the emergency department physicians collaborated in the development of a five-part ordered classification ranging from least to most immediate and a set of associated decision rules.
The sets of pictures used were identical to the sets used by Helm et al. [21], covering pictures with valence scores ranging from 1.45 (negative) to 8.28 (positive) and arousal scores from 2.28 (low) to 7.12 (high), according to the standard IAPS classification (ranging from 1 to 9).
At study entry, their CDC-defined HIV disease classification ranged from A1-C3.
Overall accuracy of the classification ranged from 87% in Wioso and Akutuase to 95% in Obenimase.
Seven specific domains (ease of use, clarity, exclusiveness of categories, inclusiveness of classification, possibility of using classification prospectively, reproducibility and requirements for implementation) were graded (2 = good; 1 = median; 0 = poor).The final grade of each classification ranged from 0 to 14, the higher the grading the better the classification.
