Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(46)
In summary, sensitivity and spatial resolution are closely related.
In patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, in whom an increased risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma exists only if advanced fibrosis is present, a meta-analysis reported summary sensitivity of 80.2 % and specificity of 85.2 % in the ARFI-based detection of significant fibrosis [62].
In the diagnosis of F ≥ 2, ARFI showed 74%% summary sensitivity and 83 % summary specificity, both reaching 87%% in the diagnosis of F = 4 [38]; the area under receiver operating curve (AUROC) values were 0.84 for F ≥ 2, 0.89 for F ≥ 3 and 0.91 for F = 4 [48].
We calculated summary sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value (NPV).
Therefore, the summary sensitivity and specificity must be interpreted with caution.
Bivariate model method will be used to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity.
Similar(14)
Where adequate data were available, we performed meta-analyses using the bivariate model (Reitsma 2005) to produce summary sensitivities and specificities.
The summary sensitivities and specificities of the APRI at various thresholds for the identification of significant fibrosis were listed in Table 2.
In our systematic review, we calculated summary sensitivities and specificities at various thresholds to translate all point estimates into clinical practice.
13 14 15 For meta-analysis of studies that used the same or similar cut-off values, we used parameter estimates from the models to derive summary operating points (that is, summary sensitivities and specificities), with 95% confidence regions, and summary likelihood ratios.
In view of previous study's primary thresholds of 0.5 and1.5 for significant fibrosis and 1.0-1.5 1.0-1.5 for cirrhosis, we exandned the areas under summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves, the summary sensitivities and specificities to provide the summary measures of test performance across all tests and these thresholds.
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