Braz. j. . vol.77 número6 en v77n6a18

The endpoint of this study was assessing the sensitivity, speciicity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of Doppler ultrasonography of the

Table 3 Sensitivity, speci fi city, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NGV) of conventional MRI and diffusion MRI in differentiating between benign

Sensivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of Bacterial Meningitis Score associated to enterovirus detection for diagnosis of

The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, likelihood ratio for a positive test, likelihood ratio for a negative test, and accuracy of

Results: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value obtained during the performance comparison of the two methods (cord factor detection

The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy for the detection of meniscal and cruciate ligament tears were calculated sepa-

Results: We observed sensitivity of 90.7%, specificity of 89.1%, a positive predictive value of 72.1%, a negative predictive value of 96.9% and a positive likelihood ratio of 9.0

Results: The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value obtained during the performance comparison of the two methods (cord factor detection