Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
A biomarker panel of KOC, S100P and mesothelin with at least 2 biomarkers positive was found to be an optimum panel with both 10%and20%0% cut-off achieving almost 100% sensitivity and specificity in resection specimens from patients with PBA.
Similar(59)
The 20% positive cells cut-off achieves marginally better sensitivity (84%) and specificity (100%) values compared with other cut-offs for KOC.
Using 20% positive cells as a cut-off achieved higher sensitivity/specificity values: KOC 84%/100%; S100P 83%/100%; mesothelin 88%/92%; and MUC1 89%/63%.
Lowering this cut-off to 3 might be considered by those prioritizing detection of mental illness regardless of the false positive rates, as this cut-off achieved a sensitivity of 85%, 95% CI [74-92 [74-92the validation study sample.
Both cut-offs achieved NPV above 95% indicating that low scoring on the risk score is associated with very low risk for AD at follow-up.
Lowering this cut-off to 4 or 5 might be considered by those prioritizing detection of mental illness regardless of the false positive rates, as these cut-offs achieved sensitivity of 80%, 95% CI [67-89 [67-8989%, 95% CI [77-95%] respectively in the vanddation study sample.
The 75th percentile figure of 33.5% productivity decrement per week was taken as the cut-off for achieving the productivity standard within the current population.
Both numbers of good scores within each approach, as well as traditional cut-off points (achieving all or mostly good scores for the indicators included within an approach [ 9]) were analysed.
As a matter of fact, the cut-off for achieving nephrogenesis, and thus the capacity of drug renal elimination, is assumed at the 33rd week of gestational age [ 32].
The cut-off to achieve the highest positive predictive value was Δ SUV% of 50% (sensitivity of 85.7%, specificity of 60.9%).
Prescription refills (80% cut-off) were achieved in 48% (CI 35 62), 64.7% (CI 51 76) and 62.7% (CI 48 74) in the control group, letter group and phone group, respectively.
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