ライフサイエンスコーパス: cutoff value

1 using 50% of a remote control segment as the cutoff value.

2 o determine the myocardial enhancement ratio cutoff value.

3 ularly with respect to the aortic valve area cutoff value.

4 ant in 47% with the known FFR, using 0.80 as cutoff value.

5 only, without the requirement of a distance cutoff value.

6 tic curves revealed a PFR of 1.4 as the best cutoff value.

7 y network is at least a specified similarity cutoff value.

8 solates were tested to determine the best CR cutoff value.

9 ty, which can be improved by using optimized cutoff values.

10 by Cohen's kappa coefficient with different cutoff values.

11 curve was used to calculate optimal referral cutoff values.

12 =50% probability, were determined and called cutoff values.

13 he calculation of 95% quantiles for defining cutoff values.

14 motion and nNO levels below or near the PCD cutoff values.

15 tely 8% of healthy volunteers using the same cutoff values.

16 nes of various material and molecular-weight cutoff values.

17 mV is more accurate than previously reported cutoff values.

18 erating characteristic analysis to calculate cutoff values.

19 erating characteristic analysis to calculate cutoff values.

20 lternative pairs of uniform and sex-specific cutoff values.

21 With the use of the uniform cutoff value, 127 women (14.5%) and 345 men (18.6%) rece

22 (sensitivity = 86%, specificity = 85%, best cutoff value = 14%, area under the curve = 0.892 +/-, wh

23 value, 42.92 pg/mL), and cathelicidin LL-37 (cutoff value, 3221.01 pg/mL) is presented with a sensiti

24 sed on CSF concentrations of interleukin 13 (cutoff value, 37.26 pg/mL), vascular endothelial growth

25 pg/mL), vascular endothelial growth factor (cutoff value, 42.92 pg/mL), and cathelicidin LL-37 (cuto

26 Numeric cutoff values (5 cm for diameters and 65 cm(3) for volum

27 n) had the best overall predictive accuracy (cutoff value, 50.37; 94.9% sensitivity, 91.7% specificit

28 se in the fraction of CD14(+)/CD16(-) cells (cutoff value, 94.0%).

29 Rounded cutoff values above the limit of detection may not have

30 The prognostic value of 5 cutoff values after completion of treatment or after all

31 The method minimizes the use of arbitrary cutoff values, allows a collective consideration of the

32 vised classifier converged with previous PET cutoff values and the established CSF Abeta1-42 cutoff l

33 Tumors were classified using predefined cutoff values, and all were correctly identified in blin

34 for the detection of AVS selectivity at all cutoff values, and for all ratios, the cutoff value of a

35 that are sufficient to reach a predetermined cutoff value are considered invalid and discarded.

36 Currently applied UV cutoff values are based on studies that lacked epicardia

37 entified Zva >/=4.7 mm Hg/mL per m(2) as the cutoff value associated with syncope in patients with AS

38 ntly higher specificity (P<.0001) than sIgE (cutoff value at 0.35 IU/mL) and the specificity was not

39 For asthma and hay fever, SPT (cutoff value at 3 mm) had a significantly higher specifi

40 Levels of inflammatory markers under the cutoff value between postoperative days 3 and 5 ensure s

41 rmal SPECT and high CACS (22%), defined by a cutoff value CACS of 1,314 or more, and lowest in patien

42 ponemal signal strength ratio values above a cutoff value can be used in lieu of repeat treponemal te

43 onent ampholyte buffers with well-defined pI cutoff values, controlled separation of protein mixture

44 Ideally, the accuracy of our target ROI and cutoff value could be further validated with PET-autopsy

45 LSI clinical breakpoints and epidemiological cutoff value criteria, as appropriate.

46 between CAR and prognosis, regardless of the cutoff value, cutoff value selection, treatment method,

47 timize clinical sensitivity and specificity, cutoff values (cycle thresholds [C(T)]) were established

48 Cutoff values define low- and high-risk groups and impro

49 The PET cutoff values derived from an unsupervised classifier co

50 7 ratio of 4.7 was identified as the optimal cutoff value discriminating sensitive and refractory pat

51 The cutoff values discriminating survivors from nonsurvivors

52 es selection of seed alignment sequences and cutoff values during protein family construction.

53 Using the epidemiological cutoff value (ECV) of 0.12 mug/ml for both caspofungin a

54 defined in order to establish epidemiologic cutoff values (ECVs) for five Aspergillus spp. and itrac

55 lishment of species-specific epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) for the systemically active antifun

56 nical breakpoints (CBPs) and epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) have been established for several C

57 nce of clinical breakpoints, epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) have been established to distinguis

58 Using the epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) of 0.12 mug/ml for caspofungin and

59 For these combinations, epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) provide a methodology for categoriz

60 e (WT) MIC distributions and epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) provides a sensitive means for dete

61 ithout fluconazole CBPs, the epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) were used to differentiate wild-typ

62 By using the 24- and 48-h epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs), the categorical agreement between

63 using previously determined epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs).

64 using previously determined epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs).

65 with >15% of SPTRX3-positive spermatozoa, a cutoff value established by ROC analysis, had their chan

66 genus, >/=1.7; species, >/=2.0) and adjusted cutoff values established by this study (genus, >/=1.5;

67 Stratifying by cutoff value for a positive test result or removal of di

68 iagnostic performance of FITs depends on the cutoff value for a positive test result.

69 ity testing and the biosensor assay when the cutoff value for attenuation of light transmission was 6

70 immunohistochemical staining and generate a cutoff value for differentiation between normal prostate

71 The optimal cutoff value for face mask-delivered noninvasive mechani

72 A cutoff value for global myocardial T2 of >/=60 ms provid

73 ocess was the automated determination of the cutoff value for group separation, which was dependent o

74 The optimal cutoff value for HMR was 2.5 mm Hg/cm per second.

75 The cutoff value for initial BG <416 pg/mL has potential to

76 r operating characteristic analysis with the cutoff value for MA of 65 mm or greater returned area un

77 The sex-specific 90th percentile cutoff value for mPA diameter was 28.9 mm in men and 26.

78 basis of ROC curves, the most discriminative cutoff value for MTV values was an MTV threshold of 60%

79 tribution, the estimation of the optimal PRU cutoff value for predicting clinical outcome, and the id

80 Using a cutoff value for proadrenomedullin taken 6 hours after a

81 aracteristic analysis identified the optimal cutoff value for proven meningitis to be 66 pg/ml (sensi

82 The 90th percentile cutoff value for ratio PA of the healthy referent group

83 n splines were used to determine the optimal cutoff value for separating transcripts with high and lo

84 election of a region of interest (ROI) and a cutoff value for the automated classification of subject

85 sitivity and specificity associated with the cutoff value for the best performance were 82% and 74% f

86 d in order to recommend the optimum negative cutoff value for the cELISA.

87 g characteristic curve analysis, the optimal cutoff value for the composite endpoint was PRU >/=234 (

88 The cutoff value for the highest SUVmax of (18)F-FDG aiming

89 A data-driven cutoff value for the ratio of septal apical to basal LSs

90 n of an optimal target ROI and an associated cutoff value for the separation of subjects into the Abe

91 intermediate-, or high-risk groups based on cutoff values for 2 of the following: NAFLD fibrosis sco

92 Cutoff values for 99.5% specificity were determined.

93 ensitivity for CRC improved with lower assay cutoff values for a positive test result (for example, 0

94 The goal of this study was to determine cutoff values for absolute MBF and to evaluate the diagn

95 The best cutoff values for circulating BMP-9 to predict MetS was

96 akpoints and, more recently, epidemiological cutoff values for clinically relevant fungal pathogens.

97 (SPE based method), which are lower than the cutoff values for confirmative conclusions regarding coc

98 analysis to determine the best symptom score cutoff values for detection of remission.

99 sCD48 optimal cutoff values for differentiating asthma from health wer

100 ults in a large data set define and optimize cutoff values for early diagnosis of molecular relapse.

101 Cutoff values for fibrosis stages >/=F1, >/=F2, >/=F3, a

102 Cutoff values for FISH with the pancreatobiliary probes

103 e terms, but there are no uniformly accepted cutoff values for hemodynamically significant CAD.

104 The optimal cutoff values for HER2/CEP17 ratio and HER2 gene copy nu

105 arkers and the LIT score in the NEC group as cutoff values for identifying NEC from septicemic/contro

106 ularization decisions based on either binary cutoff values for iFR and Pd/Pa or hybrid strategies inc

107 Binary cutoff values for iFR and Pd/Pa result in misclassificat

108 ) within affected families is often based on cutoff values for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (L

109 uction >/=1.4%LV were identified as the best cutoff values for MACE prediction.

110 T1 cutoff values for oedematous versus necrotic myocardium

111 The cutoff values for optimal identification of significant

112 Cutoff values for patient outcome were determined using

113 Cutoff values for RA area were significantly different i

114 rees of unreliability, instead of relying on cutoff values for reliability indices.

115 ETATION: Our findings challenge the proposed cutoff values for spirometry, the order in which the lun

116 The cutoff values for SSI and FibroScan for staging fibrosis

117 Optimized cutoff values for subclinical keratoconus increased the

118 Cutoff values for the detection of these low-abundance v

119 tic curves were used to identify the optimal cutoff values for the textural features and TLG.

120 ation is needed of new age- and sex-specific cutoff values for this assay.

121 r curve analysis was used to select critical cutoff values for use in clinical settings in which a ba

122 lysis indicated that the NCAR cylinder test (cutoff value >/= 0.875 D) was the best test for screenin

123 dictive value for both tests was 95% using a cutoff value >/=1 ISU/l with poor corresponding sensitiv

124 Using the manufacturer's cutoff value (>/=80 pg/ml), the sensitivity and specific

125 esponse to TMVR after 6 months of follow-up (cutoff value, >/= 6.4%; area under the curve, 0.81; P =

126 On the contrary, for large cutoff value, >10.0 A, only very large cavities are dete

127 Cutoff values, guidelines, and clinical recommendations

128 All higher rounded cutoff values had sensitivities less than 98.0%.

129 iac arrest, but the relevance of recommended cutoff values has been questioned due to the lack of a s

130 This cutoff value identified 104 patients with advanced fibro

131 Optimized cutoff values identified subjects with celiac disease on

132 The use of an optimized cutoff value improved pneumococcal etiology determinatio

133 ls of hs-cTnT were already above the uniform cutoff value in 427 patients (sensitivity, 91.3% [95% CI

134 of 5.95 mo were determined to be the optimal cutoff values in the prediction of a positive (11)C-chol

135 ategorical measure using the 85th percentile cutoff value) in controls and rates of cognitive decline

136 These parameters need to be considered when cutoff values indicating the need for treatment or even

137 A significantly higher QFT cutoff value is needed to match the historical TST conve

138 rebrospinal fluid (CSF), and the appropriate cutoff value is unknown.

139 t (for example, 0.89 [CI, 0.80 to 0.95] at a cutoff value less than 20 microg/g vs. 0.70 [CI, 0.55 to

140 wice: once using the uniform 99th percentile cutoff value level of 14 ng/L and once using sex-specifi

141 When assessed using categorical cutoff values, LNR had a somewhat better prognostic perf

142 revalence, negative predictive values of CLQ cutoff values (men, 0.99 [573 of 582]; women, 0.97 [745

143 However, new cutoff values might be needed to differentiate subclinic

144 Using the optimal cutoff values obtained from receiver-operating character

145 ns (16%; P = 0.78) by pyrosequencing using a cutoff value of >/= 2.0%, and at 125 codons (28%; P < 0.

146 Using a score cutoff value of >/=1.8, the Biotyper correctly identifie

147 Using a cutoff value of >/=80 pg/ml, we found the sensitivity (4

148 6% specificity for SPA incompleteness with a cutoff value of >10 seconds and a 59% sensitivity and 60

149 a 59% sensitivity and 60% specificity with a cutoff value of >5 seconds.

150 ed for elevated versus normal levels using a cutoff value of >7.0 mmol/l.

151 Detection of a carbapenemase gene at a C(T) cutoff value of </=35 was culture confirmed in 23/24 (96

152 A cutoff value of +1 represents a high sensitivity (95.0%)

153 A TAG320 cutoff value of -15.1 HU/10 mm as previously described w

154 A cutoff value of -47 provided sensitivity of 92.0%, speci

155 Use of a cutoff value of -80 to differentiate edematous vertebral

156 Using an PSD cutoff value of 0.057 alone gave 100% specificity and 10

157 Using a cutoff value of 0.3 ng/mL for PCT and 20 mg/L for CRP, n

158 The ROC curve analysis identified an optimal cutoff value of 0.334/min for K(trans) to predict HT ris

159 cocaine in hair was found to comply with the cutoff value of 0.5 ng/mg recommended by the Society of

160 ount [HC] and low-count [LC]-MBL) based on a cutoff value of 0.5 x 10(9)/L clonal B cells.

161 its/(final-initial hematocrit+0.01)), with a cutoff value of 0.75.

162 Using an FFR cutoff value of 0.80, the sensitivity, specificity, and

163 92% and specificity of 91% were found with a cutoff value of 0.87.

164 the isovolumetric relaxation period, using a cutoff value of 1 s(-1).

165 An [18F]-AV-1451 SUVR cutoff value of 1.19 (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 86

166 The use of an initial cholesterol cutoff value of 1.35 MoM (95th percentile) plus a mutati

167 With a cutoff value of 1.37x10(-3) mm2/sec, the sensitivity and

168 hthalmic practice, the precapsulotomy log(s) cutoff value of 1.44 can be used as an indicator for ben

169 The highest accuracy was obtained at the cutoff value of 1.5 choroidal nodules detected by NIR im

170 pecificity were 67% and 77% (p=0.003) at the cutoff value of 1.5 for b=600 s/mm(2), and 79% and 62% (

171 The use of a prespecified cholesterol cutoff value of 1.53 multiples of the median (MoM, corre

172 lammatory response syndrome criteria average cutoff value of 1.72 had 51% sensitivity and 77% specifi

173 A cutoff value of 1.8 D for ACA had 90.2% sensitivity and

174 ficity of 82%/63% associated with an optimal cutoff value of 1.95 mm(2).

175 00 s/mm(2), and 79% and 62% (p=0.004) at the cutoff value of 1.99 for b=1000 s/mm(2) as regards the d

176 Using for all parameter changes the cutoff value of 10, we found similar predictive values f

177 Against the composite diagnostic standard, a cutoff value of 10,000 copies/ml for good-quality sputum

178 An LTB4 cutoff value of 11 pg/mL EBC provides 100% sensitivity a

179 al = 0.996-1.000, p < 0.001) with an optimal cutoff value of 11.5%.

180 A cutoff value of 138 pg/mL provided 100% sensitivity and

181 Using GAM, the cutoff value of 14.7 mug/L for pi-GST showed the best pe

182 nd to be 94% and 100%, respectively, using a cutoff value of 142 mum.

183 cificity for IVUS was 67%/65% for an optimal cutoff value of 2.36 mm(2).

184 d difference of calcium volume score, with a cutoff value of 2.5.

185 A cutoff value of 2.7 ng/mL separated the 2 groups.

186 00 s/mm(2), and 86% and 61% (p=0.003) at the cutoff value of 2.9 for b=1000 s/mm(2) as regrads the di

187 The incidence of malignancy was 88% above a cutoff value of 20 HU in the ten (18)F-FDG-equivocal lym

188 At a cutoff value of 22.3 kPa, sensitivity, specificity, posi

189 ghest agreement (kappa=.44) was found with a cutoff value of 3 and 5 mm for SPT, and 3.5 IU/mL for sI

190 At the cutoff value of 3 mm for SPT and 0.35 IU/mL for sIgE, SP

191 a were also reviewed according to a clinical cutoff value of 3 mug/mL.

192 pecificity were 78% and 79% (p=0.001) at the cutoff value of 3.1 for b=600 s/mm(2), and 86% and 61% (

193 T SUV max with a cutoff value of 3.2 is the best prognostic indicator.

194 T SUV max with a cutoff value of 3.2 was the most significant prognostic

195 g prostate cancer development, identifying a cutoff value of 3.25 ng/mL with a sensitivity and a spec

196 OMA-IR values as a continuous variable and a cutoff value of 3.8 confirmed the association between re

197 al right ventricular scar, an endocardial UV cutoff value of 3.9 mV is more accurate than previously

198 was 100% and the specificity was 94.1% at a cutoff value of 46.0 ng of fibulin-3 per milliliter.

199 ith CLL, from which it is discriminated by a cutoff value of 5 x 10(9)/L circulating clonal B cells.

200 a specificity of 94.2% were reached, using a cutoff value of 5%.

201 esion revascularization at 1-year follow-up (cutoff value of 5.1 mm(2); P=0.05).

202 A cutoff value of 51.0 kPa at 4 cm proximal to the medial

203 ity of 96.7% and a specificity of 95.5% at a cutoff value of 52.8 ng of fibulin-3 per milliliter.

204 acteristic curve analysis yielded an optimal cutoff value of 55% for ISA.

205 With application of a low troponin I cutoff value of 6 ng/L, the rule-out algorithm showed a

206 agnostic accuracy of our previously reported cutoff value of 6.5x10(5) BKV viral capsid protein 1 (VP

207 Thus, a cutoff value of 600 U/L was utilized.

208 An LXA4 cutoff value of 7 pg/mL EBC provides 90% sensitivity and

209 ormed similarly to the previously identified cutoff value of 8,000 copies/ml for NP swab lytA rtPCR (

210 A TLF10 cutoff value of 8,000 discriminated survivors from nonsu

211 With a cutoff value of 84% on day 4 for the diagnosis of alloge

212 Considering %NVQ only, a cutoff value of 90% correctly categorized 28 of 30 patie

213 5% CI, 0.73-0.95]; P < .001) revealed, for a cutoff value of 91.13 milliseconds, a sensitivity of 78.

214 t all cutoff values, and for all ratios, the cutoff value of at least 2 has the best sensitivity for

215 0 to 14 mL/min per kg were dichotomized by a cutoff value of BNP of 506 pg/mL, those with BNP<506 pg/

216 A cutoff value of CAP of 249 dB/m rules in liver steatosis

217 In addition, we aimed to identify a cutoff value of Cn for outcome prediction in this settin

218 The cutoff value of DT for prediction of 1-y survival was 55

219 e CRYSTAL and OPUS trials, respectively, the cutoff value of ETS >/= 20% (v < 20%) identified patient

220 teristic analysis indicated that the optimal cutoff value of FFR for demonstrating reversible ischemi

221 assess the clinical implications and optimal cutoff value of high platelet reactivity (HPR) in patien

222 Using a cutoff value of IP-10 >/=44.2 pg/mL, the model identifie

223 an accuracy of 0.79 (0.66-0.93), the optimal cutoff value of pre-LT BNP serum level to predict ICU mo

224 nkage scheme for building the hierarchy with cutoff value of r > 0.7.

225 The optimal cutoff value of these parameters was defined using a rec

226 A cutoff value of urinary CCL2: Cr 34.8 ng/mmol yielded a

227 The optimal cutoff value of water uptake distinguishing stroke onset

228 was based upon a standard normal transformed cutoff value of z = 3 for chromosome 21 and z = 3.95 for

229 rsus FFR </=0.80 was calculated using binary cutoff values of </=0.90 for iFR and </=0.92 for Pd/Pa,

230 . 68%, respectively, P = 0.02), with optimal cutoff values of 1.86 mL/min/g and 2.30, respectively.

231 Additional cutoff values of 15 and 40 optimized sensitivity (>0.80)

232 urately classified ATB and LTBI status, with cutoff values of 18%, 60%, and 5% for CD38+IFN-gamma+, H

233 isk score weighted by the OR was built using cutoff values of 2.2 or greater for international normal

234 n 20 microg/g vs. 0.70 [CI, 0.55 to 0.81] at cutoff values of 20 to 50 microg/g) but with a correspon

235 n and were dichotomized with 80th percentile cutoff values of 268 and 1703, respectively.

236 sBT measurements higher than the cutoff values of 5.7 and 14.5 were associated with 50% a

237 alysis, demographic factors, glycohemoglobin cutoff values of 8.0%, 8.5%, and 9.0%, and mean glycohem

238 icity (area under the curve [AUC] of 1) with cutoff values of 80 and 60, respectively.

239 The sensitivity and specificity for the cutoff values of at least 3, at least 2, and at least 1.

240 teristic curve analysis evidenced predictive cutoff values of bronchial neutrophils and nasal/bronchi

241 Optimal cutoff values of CTCA-derived parameters were determined

242 The cutoff values of LSM were selected based on the accuracy

243 antibody (multiple regression analysis), and cutoff values of measures for 2 titers of anti-Dsg with

244 We investigated whether two widely accepted cutoff values of PaO2/FIO2 and positive end-expiratory p

245 The best cutoff values of PET-derived parameters discriminating b

246 The optimal cutoff values of SUVmax and TNR were 4.8 and 2.0, respec

247 The best cutoff values of the absolute change in pulse pressure v

248 An extravascular lung water index cutoff value on day 1 of 10 mL/kg had a 63% sensitivity,

249 operating characteristic (ROC) curve optimal cutoff value (P = .001, P = .018, P = .032, P = .008, an

250 for combined ratios (sensitivity at the >/=2 cutoff value: P < .0001 for combined ratio vs Ca/Cp rati

251 This cutoff value performed similarly to the previously ident

252 the range from 0 to 50 ng/mL, covering most cutoff values proposed in previous studies.

253 , Aa/Ap ratio, and combined ratios for three cutoff values reported in the literature.

254 The AUC, sensitivity, specificity and the cutoff value, respectively, for differentiating low- fro

255 d prognosis, regardless of the cutoff value, cutoff value selection, treatment method, country, sampl

256 Assuming that, at a certain cutoff value, serum creatinine is 80% sensitive and 90%

257 For MBF, these cutoff values showed a sensitivity, specificity, and acc

258 Importantly, application of the lowered cutoff values significantly improved genus (P = 0.005)-

259 DB is the ability to allow users to select a cutoff value that modulates the balance between predicti

260 then determined goodness-of-fit and optimal cutoff values through receiver operator characteristic a

261 alue increased above 95% when increasing the cutoff value to 5.41 kUA /l.

262 The best cutoff value to differentiate between asymptomatic volun

263 group over miR-22/29a group could serve as a cutoff value to distinguish normal cervix from CIN and f

264 ysis identified 0.65 mmol/L cFFA as the best cutoff value to predict adequate (18)F-FDG uptake suppre

265 ability of the proposed endoscopic response cutoff value to predict midterm CFREM should be validate

266 complete a list of suggested parameters and cutoff values to describe lumbar spinal stenosis.

267 Cutoff values to distinguish between physiologic and pat

268 Optimal cutoff values to predict flow-limiting coronary lesion w

269 the new method is superior to the 300 ng/mL cutoff values used by the only other portable analysis s

270 This study aimed to define endocardial UV cutoff values using computed tomography-derived fat info

271 With a 50-ms cutoff value, VEU identified CRT responders with 90% sen

272 The precapsulotomy cutoff value was >/=1.44 for log(s) and >/=0.21 for logM

273 The CLQ cutoff value was 0.16 for men and 0.56 for women.

274 n postoperative day 4, on which the mean CRP cutoff value was 135 mg/L (SD: 10 mg/L), the pooled sens

275 The cutoff value was 15.0% for EW and 3.7% for OVM.

276 To dichotomize the population, an hENT1 cutoff value was defined using primary PDAC samples from

277 alculated from the DW image, and the optimal cutoff value was found by using receiver operating chara

278 The so-derived cutoff value was validated in a prospective cohort from

279 The diagnostic ability of these different cutoff values was evaluated using receiver operating cha

280 Under different coverage cutoff values, we compare four algorithms and calculate

281 and 60% decrease from baseline at week 10 as cutoff values, we determined that the respective sensiti

282 The optimal cutoff values were 2.3 and 2.5 for hyperemic MBF and myo

283 the same method was applied to SUVrange, the cutoff values were 5.8 for (18)F-FDG (specificity, 71%)

284 For HER2 GCN, the optimal cutoff values were 9.4, 10.0, and 9.5, respectively (P =

285 When lower cutoff values were applied, it appeared that subjects at

286 Laboratory test cutoff values were calculated based on receiver operatin

287 e and negative samples, empirical reactivity cutoff values were defined.

288 Burn size cutoff values were determined for mortality, burn wound

289 Cutoff values were determined using the receiver-operati

290 The PET cutoff values were established using a mixture-modeling

291 No significant cutoff values were found for SUVmax or SUVmean at univar

292 Optimal PSV cutoff values were less than 67 cm/sec and 39 cm/sec for

293 Antibody assay cutoff values were selected to provide 100% diagnostic s

294 Different cutoff values were set for endoscopic response based on

295 ession tree analysis, combined LV EF and LAS cutoff values were used to stratify patients into three

296 ach study (mean vitamin B-12 insufficiency / cutoff value), which internally corrected for geographic

297 n index, 30 was determined to be the optimal cutoff value with a sensitivity 0.62 and specificity of

298 Cutoff values with 100% positive and negative predictive

299 High NSE cutoff values with false positive rates </=5% and tight

300 on provided the following optimum diagnostic cutoff values: women 0.36 U/ml (area under curve [AUC]: