Search alternatives:
marked decrease » marked increase (Expand Search)
shap decrease » small decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
step decrease » sizes decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search)
marked decrease » marked increase (Expand Search)
shap decrease » small decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
step decrease » sizes decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search)
-
1
(A) Auxiliary marking points to ensure complete and accurate seating of the prosthesis.
Published 2025Subjects: -
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
Stepped-Wedge Trial Diagram.
Published 2025“…<div><p>Introduction</p><p>The United States is facing an opioid use disorder (OUD) epidemic, marked by unprecedented overdose death rates. …”
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
-
14
S1 File -
Published 2025“…Following the overexpression of miRNA 221 in myocardium, there was a marked alleviation of myocardial injury and cardiomyocyte apoptosis and necrosis, significant enhancement of left ventricular systolic function, and marked decrease in the levels of PLB, p-PLB (Ser16), p-PLB (Thr17), caspase 3 and Cyt C, as well as a significant decrease in total calcium levels in myocardium.…”
-
15
SHAP waterfall plot.
Published 2025“…Across 10 models, CatBoost performed best on the test set (AUC = 0.970, accuracy = 0.920, F1 = 0.918), with robust calibration and decision-curve net benefit. SHAP interpretation ranked eGDR among the most influential predictors: SHAP summary and dependence plots indicated that higher eGDR decreased the model’s predicted probability of frailty. …”
-
16
SHAP decision plot.
Published 2025“…Across 10 models, CatBoost performed best on the test set (AUC = 0.970, accuracy = 0.920, F1 = 0.918), with robust calibration and decision-curve net benefit. SHAP interpretation ranked eGDR among the most influential predictors: SHAP summary and dependence plots indicated that higher eGDR decreased the model’s predicted probability of frailty. …”
-
17
SHAP dependence plots.
Published 2025“…Across 10 models, CatBoost performed best on the test set (AUC = 0.970, accuracy = 0.920, F1 = 0.918), with robust calibration and decision-curve net benefit. SHAP interpretation ranked eGDR among the most influential predictors: SHAP summary and dependence plots indicated that higher eGDR decreased the model’s predicted probability of frailty. …”
-
18
-
19
-
20
Biases in larger populations.
Published 2025“…Threshold parameter <i>c</i> = − 0 . 1 for the rectified cosine tuning with 4 neurons, and width <i>w</i> was 1 for von Mises tuning. …”