Showing 41 - 60 results of 447 for search 'T35 (classification)', query time: 0.06s Refine Results
  1. 41
  2. 42
  3. 43
  4. 44
  5. 45

    Commercial classification of conventional polypropylene and polyester meshes for groin hernia repair: A descriptive study by Can Deniz Deveci, Stina Öberg, Jacob Rosenberg

    Published 2024-04-01
    “…OBJECTIVE: Despite established definitions of weight classification available from the European Hernia Society and others, a discrepancy exists in the classification used by mesh companies. …”
    Get full text
    Article
  6. 46
  7. 47

    Land use and land cover classification for change detection studies using convolutional neural network by V. Pushpalatha, P.B. Mallikarjuna, H.N. Mahendra, S. Rama Subramoniam, S. Mallikarjunaswamy

    Published 2025-02-01
    “…Efficient land use land cover (LULC) classification is crucial for environmental monitoring, urban planning, and resource management. …”
    Get full text
    Article
  8. 48
  9. 49
  10. 50
  11. 51

    Validity and reliability International Classification of Diseases-10 codes for all forms of injury: A systematic review. by Sarah Paleczny, Nosakhare Osagie, Jai Sethi, Michael Cusimano

    Published 2024-01-01
    “…Across all injuries, the mean outcome values and ranges were sensitivity: 61.6% (35.5%-96.0%), specificity: 91.6% (85.8%-100%), PPV: 74.9% (58.6%-96.5%), NPV: 80.2% (44.6%-94.4%), Cohen's kappa: 0.672 (0.480-0.928), Krippendorff's alpha: 0.453, and Fleiss' kappa: 0.630. …”
    Get full text
    Article
  12. 52
  13. 53
  14. 54
  15. 55
  16. 56

    YOLOX-SwinT algorithm improves the accuracy of AO/OTA classification of intertrochanteric fractures by orthopedic trauma surgeons by Xue-Si Liu, Rui Nie, Ao-Wen Duan, Li Yang, Xiang Li, Le-Tian Zhang, Guang-Kuo Guo, Qing-Shan Guo, Dong-Chu Zhao, Yang Li, He-Hua Zhang

    Published 2025-01-01
    “…Results: The mean average precision at the intersection over union (IoU) of 0.5 (mAP50) for subgroup detection reached 90.29%. The classification accuracy values of SOTS, JOTS, SOTS + AI, and JOTS + AI groups were 56.24% ± 4.02%, 35.29% ± 18.07%, 79.53% ± 7.14%, and 71.53% ± 5.22%, respectively. …”
    Get full text
    Article
  17. 57
  18. 58
  19. 59
  20. 60