P Value. Note.—Table shows regressions performed by using only tumor ADC and by using tumor and normal PZ median ADC. The b parameters are regression parameters and their value and significance are shown respectively for each regression. Subscripts T and N = tumor and normal PZ tissue, respectively. C = regression constant. Table 4 and the model combining tumor and normal PZ ADCs can be expressed as z = 0.126 − 18.82ADCT + 13.43ADCN (4). In combination with Equation (2), these models result in a probability that a given sample is a high-grade cancer. The model incorporating normal PZ ADC (Eq [4]), together with the data used in the regres- sion, is shown in Figure 3. This plot in- dicates that a relatively high tumor ADC might still constitute a high-grade tumor if the normal PZ ADC is high. In addition, one can appreciate that using a static threshold on tumor ADC (a vertical line/ contour in Fig 3) to determine cancer aggressiveness could result in incorrect diagnosis in some patients. Diagnostic Performance of the Regression Models Including normal PZ significantly (P = .0401) improved diagnostic accuracy. The ROC curves for the regression models in Equations 3 and 4 are shown in Figure 4. The area under the curve increases from 0.91 to 0.96. We have also included flow charts detailing the diagnostic accuracy of both tests in Figure 1.
P Value. NOTE. Data are presented as means SD or medians (range, min to max). All data presented are assessments completed by the clinician at the baseline face-to-face appointment. An independent sample t test was used to compare the 2 groups. Abbreviation: BMI, body mass index. * P<.05. y nZ16 completers and nZ19 noncompleters. z nZ17 completers and nZ18 noncompleters. push-up posture (as per men, but with the lower legs together in contact with the ground and ankles plantar flexed), according to a standardized protocol.13 A marker (standard sized can of food) was placed on its end below the head of the participant to mark the range of motion required for each push-up. Prior to the test, participants completed up to 3 repetitions to ensure correct technique and then rested for 1 minute before completing the test. Participants then completed the maximum number of push- ups possible with good technique, consecutively without rest. Participants were given an exercise matc and instructed to use a can of equal size to complete their home-based test. Statistical analysis Data analyses was performed using SPSS 25.d Data were verified for normal distribution via the Xxxxxxx-Xxxxx test, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, and visualization of Q-Q plots. Patient characteristic data were compared between those who did and did not complete the home assessments using an independent t test (numerical data) or chi-square test (categorical data). A 1-sample t test was conducted to determine whether there were statistically significant differences between the clinician-measured assessments and participant home assessment for each clinical and functional test variable, with a test value of 0. Agreement between clinician and study participant assessments was determined according to Xxxxx-Xxxxxx plots. The Xxxxx- Xxxxxx plots show mean difference and limits of agree- ment between the 2 methods, with limits of agreement calculated as mean difference 1.96 standard deviation. Xxxxx-Xxxxxx analyses are reported as mean difference (95% confidence interval) and limits of agreement (lower limit of agreement [LoA]-upper LoA). The mean difference was calculated as clinician measurement minus participant measurement, and thus a positive mean difference indicated that the participant-measured value was lower than the clinician-measured value. Systematic bias was assessed by the 1-sample t test to determine if the mean difference was significantly different from 0 and/or if the line of equality (yZ0) ...
