Suggestions(1)
Exact(5)
Isolates remained susceptible to nitrofurantoin (the percentage of sensitivity of the strains was 65%).
The number of false positive, false negative, the percentage of sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each method.
b: The percentage of sensitivity was determined from the numbers of OD405 value higher cut-off values in the total ELISA results with 40 positive CAV-infected sera.
The careful selection (Table 2) of appropriate cases to be submitted to the test and the use of a cautious cut-off value (10 or 15 HU) to define benign or suspicious nodules led to a high percentage of sensitivity (Table 3), thereby excluding cases from a long follow-up.
Speaking about the resistance of microorganisms, there is still a high percentage of sensitivity to aminoglycoside antibiotics (79.4%/75%), glycopeptides (77.2%/71%), carbapenems (88.4%/78%) and also to the combination therapy (71.8%/62.4%), but also a reduction in sensitivity to the group of beta-lactam antibiotics (58.2%/32.5%) and fluoroquinolones (64.6%/36.4%).
Similar(55)
The percentages of sensitivity and PPV of each algorithm are shown.
For each algorithm, the percentages of sensitivity and PPV are shown in Table 5.
By benchmarking the score the authors obtained relatively good percentages of sensitivity and specificity (~80 85%) for a reasonable cut-off [ 11], which indicates high reliability of the data set.
For each location the measured sensitivity was expressed as a percentage of the sensitivity expected in a healthy observer matched in age.
Table 4 shows the singular values and their variabilities (in percentage) of the sensitivity matrix shown at the top panel of Fig. 10.
Singular values and their variabilities in percentage of the sensitivity matrix, which was calculated from "Equivalent Model 1" shown at the bottom panel of Fig. 15 Singular values Variability in percentage 33.66 96.88 0.038 0.111 0.0033 0.00938 0.038 0.111 0.0033 0.009
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