Copyright
©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Feb 21, 2014; 20(7): 1846-1851
Published online Feb 21, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i7.1846
Published online Feb 21, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i7.1846
Table 2 Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operating curve using the AIMS65 score cut-off point
| AIMS65 score cut-off point | Sensitivity | Specificity | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value | Area under the ROC curve |
| ≤ 0 | 35.5% | 82.1% | 89.6 | 22.8 | 0.571 |
| ≤ 1 | 66.1% | 39.3% | 82.5 | 21.2 | (SE: 0.054 |
| ≤ 2 | 87.6% | 10.7% | 80.9 | 16.7 | 95%CI: 0.49-0.65) |
| ≤ 3 | 98.4% | 3.6% | 81.5 | 33.3 |
- Citation: Jung SH, Oh JH, Lee HY, Jeong JW, Go SE, You CR, Jeon EJ, Choi SW. Is the AIMS65 score useful in predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding? World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20(7): 1846-1851
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v20/i7/1846.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i7.1846