ArticleFrontiers in research metrics and analytics2026
Guidelines for setting cut-off scores in AUC (AUC-GUIDE): balancing sensitivity, specificity, and purpose.
Article in Frontiers in research metrics and analytics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Determining ideal cut-off scores is a critical step in screening and diagnostic test evaluation. While the Area Under the Curve (AUC) with Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve are frequently reported, these do not directly indicate the best threshold for decision-making. In addition, pursuing an optimal solution might not always be practical. This paper presents a practical guideline for selecting cut-off scores based on AUC values in conjunction with sensitivity, specificity, and intended scientific use. The study outline recommended strategies for different AUC ranges, incorporating realistic considerations and scientific priorities. The framework offers flexibility, including when to prioritize sensitivity, specificity, or balanced performance via Youden's Index and other techniques. This guideline aims to support researchers and clinicians in making evidence-based, transparent, and context-sensitive decisions when interpreting screening or diagnostic accuracy results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.