The required total sample size (NETs and controls, power 0.8 and α = 0.05) to attain significant differences in NETest scores was calculated to be a minimum of 42 patients/subjects in each group. Intergroup analyses were undertaken using two-tailed non-parametric tests (Mann–Whitney U test). AUROC analysis was used to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the NETest (27 (link), 28 (link), 29 (link)). Metrics calculated included sensitivity and specificity. Prism 7.0 for Windows (GraphPad Software, www.graphpad.com ) and MedCalc Statistical Software version 16.2.1 (MedCalc Software bvba, Ostend, Belgium; http://www.medcalc.org ; 2017) were utilized. Statistical significance was defined as a P value <0.05. Data are presented as mean ± SD.
Protocol detail
Diagnostic Accuracy of NETest for Neuroendocrine Tumors
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol.
The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Corresponding Organization :
Other organizations : Medical University of Silesia, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Uppsala University Hospital
Top 5 similar protocols
Variable analysis
independent variables
- NETs (neuroendocrine tumors)
- NETest scores
- Controls (non-NETs patients/subjects)
- Positive control: None specified
- Negative control: None specified
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
Sign up for free or login to display all annotations
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!