ライフサイエンスコーパス: cut-off value

1 he proportion with intakes below a specified cut-off value.

2 ter consecutive fHb concentrations below the cut-off value.

3 rillation but calls into question the 90-day cut-off value.

4 2), with lipid arc >/=80 degrees the optimal cut-off value.

5 and accuracy were calculated based on these cut off values.

6 ecificity could be achieved by adjusting the cut-off values.

7 its were also directly compared to wild-type cut-off values.

8 Overlaps among subtypes increased at low cut-off values.

9 late sensitivity and specificity and propose cut-off values.

10 median 11%) higher than with the MINI across cut-off values.

11 t method and the lack of population-specific cut-off values.

12 eptibility above the A niger epidemiological cut-off values.

13 in a dichotomous manner using pre-specified cut-off values.

14 e or negative findings based on manufacturer cut-off values.

15 CFnoLD and determine fibrosis stage-specific cut-off values.

16 w at an arbitrary current density cut-off (J(cut-off)) value.

17 graphic signs, only increase in RV/LV ratio (cut-off value, 1.0) was independently associated with sh

18 eral flow immunoassay is developed using two cut-off values (10 and 50 mg kg(-1) gliadin) to provide

19 The cut-off values 12 and 49 provided the highest Kappa valu

20 Only resistin (cut-off value 13.7 ng/ml) and IL-6 (cut-off value 473.4

21 sensitivity 100%, specificity 67.2%], CXCL8 [cut-off value = 144.5 (pg/ml), sensitivity 93.3%, specif

22 Good results in terms of the cut-off value (2.32% mass fraction of soft wheat) and fa

23 nsitivity 90%, specificity 96.5%] and IL-27 [cut-off value = 2363 (pg/ml), sensitivity 96.7%, specifi

24 sensitivity 100%, specificity 98.28%], ADA [cut off value 27.5 (IU/l), sensitivity 90%, specificity

25 A high level of IL-6 [cut-off value = 3260 (pg/ml), sensitivity 100%, specific

26 tors of TPE were combined ADA.IL-27 [optimal cut-off value = 42.68 (10(3) U ng/l(2)), sensitivity 100

27 esistin (cut-off value 13.7 ng/ml) and IL-6 (cut-off value 473.4 pg/ml) were reliable early markers o

28 pooled PHQ-9 sensitivity and specificity at cut-off values 5-15, separately, among studies that used

29 However, the current PDFF cut-off value (5%) used to define steatosis by magnetic

30 sensitivity 93.3%, specificity 58.6%], CCL1 [cut-off value = 54 (pg/ml), sensitivity 100%, specificit

31 sitivity 100%, specificity 70.7%] and IP-10 [cut-off value = 891.9 (pg/ml), sensitivity 83.3%, specif

32 The epidemiological cut-off value 99% (ECV(99)) amongst genotypically wild t

33 A BNP cut-off value above 385 pg/ml demonstrated high specific

34 Considering 1 mm GT as relevant cut-off value, all methods showed a high positive predic

35 Considering 1 mm GT as relevant cut-off value, all methods showed a high positive predic

36 Optimal early T1 shortening cut-off value and its diagnostic performance in the iden

37 emoglobin (fHb) concentrations below the FIT cut-off value and later development of colorectal advanc

38 Diagnostic accuracy, optimal cut-off values and best position for FE NO50 within a pa

39 t there remains uncertainty about exact safe cut-off values and limited assay availability.

40 as 3.29 +/- 0.91 D considering 0.1 LogMAR as cut-off value, and 4.82 +/- 0.69 D when 0.3 logMAR as cu

41 e analysis was used to determine the optimal cut-off values, and a logistic regression model was used

42 Cut off values are not available for tree nuts.

43 -in scoring function, and arrays exceeding a cut-off value are reported.

44 hanges in LSM do not correlate with HVPG and cut-off values are not reliable in ruling out CSPH after

45 Considering the cut-off values associated with the positivity rate of He

46 A vWF-Ag cut-off value at 315% can clearly stratify patients with

47 PDFF cut-off values at 90% specificity were 16.3% for grades

48 At cut-off values chosen to give negative predictive values

49 of 112.5 ml was a marker of SAP and 433.0 ml cut-off value could be used to predict the need of inter

50 ients with depression with the HADS-D, lower cut-off values could be used to avoid false negatives an

51 ated that 16.95 units was the most effective cut-off value (COV) to discriminate correctly between ce

52 However, current cut-off values denoting slow clearance based on the prop

53 g and therapeutic interventions based on the cut-off values derived from ROC (receiver operating char

54 At all cut-off values, FIT sensitivity for CRC was higher (rang

55 A cut off value for mean ADC between Ependymomas and Medul

56 Cut off values for change in left ventricular end-diasto

57 The cut off values for diagnosis of celiac disease were vill

58 blood glucose concentrations and use a lower cut-off value for diagnosis than the WHO criteria.

59 d for each parameter to identify the optimal cut-off value for differentiation of the LNs.

60 ith discrepancy, 16 mm Hg was still the best cut-off value for HVPG-Free, but not for HVPG-IVC, among

61 risk and the idea that 140 mm Hg is a useful cut-off value for hypertension for all adults.

62 We proposed PRD 10 deg(2) as an exploratory cut-off value for ICD implantation.

63 e proposed PRD >=10 deg(2) as an exploratory cut-off value for ICD implantation.

64 There is no established cut-off value for increased number of IELs in the bulb.W

65 Optimal PHR cut-off value for KC was calculated as 4807 with 74.8% s

66 In addition, on ROC curve analysis a cut-off value for medullary FA of 0.4 had a sensitivity

67 ainly retrospective, of low size, and lack a cut-off value for MPO.

68 An ideal cut-off value for OCT-RNFL was then determined by calcul

69 A cut-off value for ONSD was derived using ROC analysis.

70 The cut-off value for ONSD was taken as 4.57 mm, derived usi

71 wever, the exact glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) cut-off value for prediabetes remains controversial.

72 The best cut-off value for prediction of EEs was MLV>/=20 mm with

73 ol levels and calculated a salivary cortisol cut-off value for screening adrenocortical function.

74 s shown to be rather sensitive to the chosen cut-off value for structural similarity.

75 =50 mm Hg, which is the universally accepted cut-off value for the diagnosis of the vasodepressor for

76 83.78- 99.92% CI) for a cycle threshold (Ct) cut-off value for the reference test of 35 and 80.00% (6

77 Subgroup analysis included cut-off values for annual volume of pancreatoduodenectom

78 ic (ROC) analysis established discriminative cut-off values for both raw and cooked meat, with perfor

79 ristics can be achieved by allowing separate cut-off values for both sexes.

80 ical cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer's disease cut-off values for cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-beta1-42

81 When cut-off values for clinical affectation (measured as MSS

82 hm pertaining to MCF parameters to establish cut-off values for ClotPro device.

83 algorithms based on subjective diagnoses and cut-off values for continuous predictors.

84 Cut-off values for CPV and EPV were established for fibr

85 eria, developed using sensitive and specific cut-off values for demyelination and incorporating new k

86 d false positive screens, at different PHQ-9 cut-off values for different clinical settings using the

87 myocardial viability and establish practical cut-off values for differentiating normal myocardial tis

88 erating characteristic analysis to determine cut-off values for differentiation between low and inter

89 stic (ROC) curves, we determined the optimal cut-off values for each score for these outcomes.

90 Subsequently cut-off values for healthy volunteers were calculated.

91 (ROC) curve analysis was performed to define cut-off values for high and low ratios of these indices.

92 lysis was used to yield the most significant cut-off values for individual factors.

93 characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, optimal cut-off values for left ventricular (LV) geometrical par

94 The cut-off values for levels of hemoglobin in buffer and st

95 Optimal M30 cut-off values for mild and severe ballooning were 330 a

96 However, when we added cut-off values for narrow angles, we found that glaucoma

97 This enables defining cut-off values for observed read counts.

98 the ROC analysis, there were no satisfactory cut-off values for OPN that would distinguish patients w

99 Cut-off values for sarcopenia, defined as SMI < 50 cm(2)

100 ality for assessing muscle mass, the optimal cut-off values for sarcopenia, the ideal timing and freq

101 eometric formula determined sample sizes and cut-off values for SDs.

102 compared with those from the guaiac test for cut-off values for stool samples, positivity rates, and

103 Cut-off values for the best sum of sensitivity and speci

104 Moreover, we provide cut-off values for the significant predictors of phenoco

105 The cut-off values for the statistically significant (p <0.0

106 around the tests employed and the diagnostic cut-off values (for bacterial numbers) used to diagnose

107 We calculated the reference ranges (cut-off values) for absolute IS and T2-time values and r

108 was to determine the reference values (i.e. cut-off values) for absolute signal intensity and T2 rel

109 Using cut-off values from receiver-operating characteristic an

110 With a cut-off value > 0.015 mmol/l indicating IBS, the sensiti

111 Similarly, for polyp detection, a cut-off value > 19 U/ml has a sensitivity of 96.3% and t

112 For tumor detection in plasma specimens, a cut-off value > 25 U/ml has a sensitivity and specificit

113 The Pit-SCHEME score with a cut-off value >= 6 achieved a sensitivity of 86% and pos

114 ts apart from tear osmolarity, regardless of cut-off value (>308 mOsm/L, >316 mOsm/L, and inter-eye d

115 osing SKC from normal eyes, TBI (AUC: 0.858, Cut-off value: > 0.33, Youden index: 0.55), ARTh (AUC: 0

116 1, Youden index: 0.58), and CBI (AUC: 0.804, Cut-off value: > 0.47, Youden index: 0.49) appeared as g

117 ectrodes across literature where different J(cut-off) values have been used.

118 PHES cut-off value in Cameroonians is - 3, with MHE prevalenc

119 ot be identified using the recommended CH(4) cut-off values in FM or LM.

120 above the 18 mL.min -1 .kg -1 , that is, the cut-off value known to induce difficulty in performing d

121 With a cut-off value<8 mm Hg for central venous pressure, kappa

122 0.33, Youden index: 0.55), ARTh (AUC: 0.813, Cut-off value: <= 488.1, Youden index: 0.58), and CBI (A

123 lopes rather than relying solely on specific cut-off values may allow early detection of at-risk pati

124 dent UK/international cohorts using clinical cut off values (n=10,301; UK-cohort, ASPIRE and FDA coho

125 ments 32 (60%) were situated between the two cut-off values obtained by the receiver operating charac

126 iagnosing actively rejecting grafts (optimal cut-off value [OCV] of 19 mum, 24 mum, and 26 mum, respe

127 When a cut off value of 204 ug/L (4338 mU/L) was used, specific

128 At the cut-off value of > 1.280, it had a specificity and sensi

129 With a cut-off value of > 13.75, RDW was able to predict patien

130 Using a vWF-Ag cut-off value of >/= 241%, the AUC for detection of CSPH

131 Compared to the FFR cut-off value of </=0.80, the diagnostic accuracy of the

132 Considering the VAE-NT group, optimized TBI cut-off value of 0.295 provided a sensitivity of 89.5% a

133 Considering all cases, the cut-off value of 0.335 for the TBI provided a sensitivit

134 yielded 499,411 phosphorylated sites with a cut-off value of 0.5 and 237,949 phosphorylated sites wi

135 With a cut-off value of 0.585, BSI demonstrated the strongest a

136 0.5 and 237,949 phosphorylated sites with a cut-off value of 0.7.

137 The ADC cut-off value of 1.149 x 10-3 mm(2)/s showed the highest

138 specific O-RADS MRI score 4 subgroup, an ADC cut-off value of 1.22 x 10(-3) mm(2)/s had 86% sensitivi

139 at the HC level was found to be 90% when the cut-off value of 1.25 was identified.

140 An apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) cut-off value of 1.30 x 10(-3) mm(2)/s had 89% sensitivi

141 ty of 78.1% and specificity of 73.3%, with a cut-off value of 1.4 x 10(-3) mm(2)/s in the differentia

142 V (area under the curve, 0.78) and a bipolar cut-off value of 1.55 mV (area under the curve, 0.69) be

143 The dual-ICTS provided a cut-off value of 1.8 mug L(-1) for MG and LMG detection.

144 a negative FIT result at baseline (below the cut-off value of 10 mug Hb/ g feces).

145 Using this model, the current 'day-3' cut-off value of 10% predicts the potential presence of

146 ty (95% confidence interval) at the standard cut-off value of 10, which maximised combined sensitivit

147 gnosis of colorectal cancer, ferritin with a cut-off value of 100 mcg/L had a sensitivity of 93% (CI:

148 Using a cut-off value of 100 vc/ml plasma and clinical diagnosis

149 (0.38 to 0.51) and 0.95 (0.93 to 0.96) for a cut-off value of 11 or higher.

150 An optimal cervical spinal cord GM CSA cut-off value of 11.1 mm(2) was found to enable accurate

151 The calculated liver stiffness measurement cut-off value of 14.4 kPa held 94% accuracy, 100% sensit

152 An FCP cut-off value of 150 mg/kg achieved the highest summatio

153 FCP concentration with a cut-off value of 150 mg/kg had only fair to good accurac

154 IL-6 with cut-off value of 157.0 pg/ml was a predictor of necrosis

155 We identified a driving pressure cut-off value of 19 cm H2O where an ordinal increment wa

156 the model, with untransformed AFP values, a cut-off value of 2 was identified.

157 100% specificity and 79% sensitivity; a PDFF cut-off value of 2.0% identified patients with steatosis

158 A cut-off value of 2.1 kPa/year was associated with an 8.4

159 ROC analysis yielded an optimal cut-off value of 2.245 (AUC=0.999, p<0.001, sensitivity=

160 When combined, PET and SUV(max) (cut-off value of 2.85) showed an improved performance co

161 At the accepted cut-off value of 20U for MDW, sensitivities were 83.7% (

162 At an optimal cut-off value of 23.9 pg/mL, the sensitivity and specifi

163 0.839; 95% CI, 0.751-0.927) with an optimal cut-off value of 24.3%.

164 ting characteristics (AUROC 0.590) at an ALT cut-off value of 27.5 IU/L were 55.8% and 64.7%, respect

165 We identified a plateau pressure cut-off value of 29 cm H2O, above which an ordinal incre

166 BF1 protein in tissues was conducted using a cut-off value of 3 (intensity plus proportion).

167 w (n = 191) NLR groups according to the best cut-off value of 3.88.

168 The global ECV cut-off value of 31.05% differentiated both groups (AUC

169 the preoperative CSMT was >=300 mum, with a cut-off value of 347.3 mum in the case group (p < 0.000)

170 id PoC test for SARS-CoV-2 at a reference Ct cut-off value of 35.

171 For FIB-5, a cut-off value of 36.2 had a sensitivity of 88.9%, specif

172 ng to ROC curves, in the tumor group, at the cut-off value of 4 U/ml, the sensitivity of fecal tM2-PK

173 For FIB-4, a cut-off value of 4.2 had a sensitivity of 88.9%, specifi

174 previous study results suggesting a reliable cut-off value of 4.5 mm, it was decided to maintain 4.5

175 CI) without altering the reference test's Ct cut-off value of 40.

176 excellent (global radial strain with optimal cut-off value of 40.43%: AUC, 0.946 [95% CI, 0.93-1.00];

177 of 89.5% but lower specificity of 67.7% at a cut-off value of 408.35.

178 t less with relative lens position, while LP cut-off value of 5.1 mm could be used for predicting nar

179 ts with PCP; thus, application of a post hoc cut-off value of 50 copies/tube increased the specificit

180 A cut-off value of 50 nmol/L was used to define VDD.

181 lihood of SB (OR = 0.905, p = 0.006), with a cut-off value of 50 years (AUC = 0.259, 95% CI: 0.149-0.

182 A cut-off value of 6.0 ng/mL for GSDMD was identified as o

183 A cut-off value of 6.0 was shown to give the best discrimi

184 r-operator characteristic curves, a unipolar cut-off value of 6.78 mV (area under the curve, 0.78) an

185 ng recipients of DR-mismatched allografts, a cut-off value of 60 interferon-gamma spots/10(6) cells s

186 t cytokine (P < 0.0001), and with an optimal cut-off value of 67.5 pg/mL, the sensitivity and specifi

187 A T2 cut-off value of 76 msec enabled the differentiation of

188 analysis because they only identify the high cut-off value of a biomarker by utilizing color changes

189 antibodies [EMA]) and to determine the lower cut-off value of anti- anti-TTG level that best predicts

190 erated characteristics analysis for the best cut-off value of anti-TTG level for diagnosis of CD was

191 The cut-off value of CFT for initiating systemic treatment w

192 In a post hoc analysis, a cut-off value of CFT for systemic treatment initiation i

193 ent to 0.04 unit/mL and 260 ng/dL) below the cut-off value of circulating PLA2 (2.07 nM, equivalent t

194 A cut-off value of eight or higher generated similar combi

195 (0.68 to 0.79) and 0.84 (0.81 to 0.87) for a cut-off value of eight or higher, and 0.44 (0.38 to 0.51

196 emochromatosis screening program that uses a cut-off value of greater than 60% to define elevated ser

197 3.6% (29/123) dogs had cOA, depending on the cut-off value of joint pain; moderate (2), or mild (1),

198 rectly predicted 84% of the responses with a cut-off value of k=0.21 per day (in log scale).

199 The cut-off value of Ln(A/N) = 6.98 was determined from the

200 The optimal cut-off value of MRR was 3.0.

201 gnostic performance and to obtain a feasible cut-off value of perfusion parameters to differentiate l

202 ue approach was used to evaluate the optimal cut-off value of recurrence-free survival to divide the

203 The cut-off value of RNIC was 0.24 (sensitivity: 85% [86 of

204 nsitivity and specificity was maximised at a cut-off value of seven or higher for semi-structured int

205 hen screening for major depression, a HADS-D cut-off value of seven or higher maximised combined sens

206 0.76 to 0.87) and 0.78 (0.74 to 0.81) for a cut-off value of seven or higher, 0.74 (0.68 to 0.79) an

207 According to the ROC curve, the optimal cut-off value of SIRI and CIPI was 1.376 (sensitivity 52

208 , which is 4 orders magnitude lower than NSE cut-off value of small cell lung cancer.

209 A cut-off value of symptomatic SBP of </=85 mm Hg seems mo

210 A cut-off value of the annual CRS/HIPEC caseload affecting

211 The optimal cut-off value of the appendiceal diameter was 6.5 mm.

212 tor characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the cut-off value of the CRP/albumin ratio for RVO was 0.42,

213 The cut-off value of the mean ADC for individual kidneys was

214 To obtain an optimal cut-off value of the strain ratio for differentiating be

215 Therefore one cut-off value of these parameters for all the rectus mus

216 Applying a cut-off value of, e.g., 10% DAMGO binding would lead to

217 nt when higher baseline Lp(a) was defined by cut-off values of >=75 versus <75 nmol/L (n=35 versus 94

218 tween sensitivity and specificity, optimized cut-off values of - 0.32 for cVEMP and - 0.11 for oVEMP

219 Cut-off values of -1.455 (NFS) and 1.3 (FIB-4) have nega

220 When applying the pre-specified cut-off values of 34 mL/m(2) for LAVI and -15% for GLS,

221 In the population aged > or = 65 years, when cut-off values of 40 and 0.5 ng/ml were chosen for DJ-1

222 ed a clearly visible limit of detection with cut-off values of 500, 5, and 0.5 mug L(-1) for NEO, PEN

223 For qualitative analysis, the cut-off values of beta-lactams, tetracyclines, quinolone

224 Cut-off values of calf circumference for low ASMI for ma

225 Gender-specific cut-off values of calf circumference for low ASMI were d

226 ls of the contamination rate were adopted as cut-off values of contamination reads.

227 The normalised cut-off values of DSC (rCBF of 1.1 and rCBV of 1.4) and

228 Based on the cut-off values of mucosal TNF and RHI scores from the ca

229 nteraction detector was used to identify the cut-off values of the annual caseload affecting the 90-d

230 trata, generated by all potential couples of cut-off values of the cNF-Skindex and the three strata d

231 The best cut-off values of TyG and TyG-BMI to predict NAFLD were

232 curves were constructed to determine optimum cut-off values of VPW and CT ratio associated with HPE.

233 Based on this cut-off value, only abnormal MRR was significantly assoc

234 s without discrepancy, 16 mm Hg was the best cut-off value predicting survival, independently of bein

235 The TEWL score cut-off value predictive of recurrence was 24.1 g.m(-2).

236 Using the 66% DeltaSUV cut-off value, reported previously, NPV and PPV were 80

237 nd 37% of stenoses at the 0.75, and 0.80 FFR cut-off value, respectively, and was characterized by mi

238 der to validate the assays we determined the cut off values, sensitivity and specificity of the assay

239 However, whether transaminases-adapted cut-off values should be used for ad-hoc decisions in pa

240 Using optimized cut-off values, significant fibrosis could be predicted

241 rtisone, fatigue scores reached a predefined cut-off value similar to the normal population score, co

242 Across reference standards and cut-off values, specificity was 0-10% (median 3%) higher

243 eiver operating characteristic analysis, and cut-off value that most accurately identified individual

244 The cut-off value that most accurately identified subjects w

245 Cut-off values that may be applied in clinical practice

246 Using existing literature cut-off values the sensitivity and specificity of breath

247 Reducing the PDFF cut-off value to 3.0% identified patients with steatosis

248 OC-analysis identified a NLR of 20.9 as best cut-off value to discriminate between elevated CBFv (AUC

249 The cut-off values to define sarcopenia were < 50 cm2/m2 in

250 ent classifier models and determine the best cut-off values to distinguish patient subgroups.

251 be used to avoid false negatives and higher cut-off values to reduce false positives and identify pe

252 l [CI]: 0.982, 0.998), and the calculated PH cut-off value (tvortex >/= 14.3%) resulted in sensitivit

253 The cut-off value used was 2.95 x 10(-3) mm(2)/s.

254 Cut-off values used to define elevated serum transferrin

255 The best cut off value was 93.5 muU/ng protein, at which the sens

256 The best cut-off value was <= 0.84, with 77.78% sensitivity and 8

257 discriminate stage F1 fibrosis from F0, the cut-off value was 0.95 for M2BPGi with a sensitivity of

258 95% CI: 2.387-18.223; P = 0.026) and optimal cut-off value was 1039 (AUC: 0.801; P = 0.002).

259 ; 95% CI: 2.387-18.223; p=0.026) and optimal cut-off value was 1039 (AUC: 0.801; p=0.002).

260 I treatment reported TS, and the optimum RDQ cut-off value was 3.06 (sensitivity, 65.4%; specificity,

261 In the ROC curve analysis, the cut-off value was calculated as 9.005 kPa in the differe

262 A cut-off value was determined, and the specificity, sensi

263 A cut-off value was established to improve discrimination.

264 Cut-off value was estimated at 28.8 Hz from negative vir

265 The breath H(2) optimal cut-off value was lower with a2 Milk(TM) (13 ppm) than c

266 The maximum cut-off value was observed for peptides 40_5 (0.765) and

267 When the ADC cut-off value was taken as <= 0.753 x 10(-3) mm(2)/s, it

268 was lower in women than in men when the same cut-off value was used to define elevated serum transfer

269 distribution, the proportion below specified cut-off values was estimated.

270 risk individuals with a FIT result below the cut-off value, we associated baseline concentrations of

271 receiving scores greater than a theoretical cut-off value were identified as potential p53 targets.

272 Salivary cortisol cut-off values were 0.015mug/dL for plasma cortisol leve

273 Sensitivity, specificity, and optimal cut-off values were calculated using ROC curve analysis.

274 Optimal cut-off values were determined with receiver operating c

275 Cut-off values were established by applying ROC curve an

276 ADC and T2* cut-off values were statistically significant across gra

277 At optimal cut-off values, which had 69-98% sensitivity in detectin