1naresh

Array
(
    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
        (
            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
            [type] => guest
            [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
            [access-type] => Controlled
            [privilege] => Array
                (
                    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
                        (
                            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
                            [type] => privilege-set
                            [privilege-set] => GUEST
                        )

                )

            [credentials] => Array
                (
                    [method] => guest
                )

        )

)
1nareshArray
(
    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
        (
            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
            [type] => guest
            [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
            [access-type] => Controlled
            [privilege] => Array
                (
                    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
                        (
                            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
                            [type] => privilege-set
                            [privilege-set] => GUEST
                        )

                )

            [credentials] => Array
                (
                    [method] => guest
                )

        )

)

Table 3: Diagnostic discrimination of iNPH patient group from other subject groups
Variable Sensitivity Specificity Positive Predictive Value Negative Predictive Value Cutoff Value of Each Measure Area Under Curve
FA value 
    Compared with AD 94 82 89 90 0.59 0.92
    Compared with PDD 94 72 85 89 0.59 0.89
    Compared with control 94 84 85 94 0.59 0.91
    Compared with AD, PDD, and control 94 80 68 97 0.59 0.91
Axial eigenvalue 
    Compared with AD 94 82 89 90 1.52 0.95
    Compared with PDD 100 82 90 100 1.48 0.96
    Compared with control 100 84 86 100 1.50 0.98
    Compared with AD, PDD, and control 94 83 71 97 1.52 0.97

Note:—Data (except for the cutoffs of FA values and axial eigenvalues) are shown as percentages. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine the optimum cutoff values for evaluating the usefulness of FA values and axial eigenvalues in differentiating iNPH from AD, PDD, and controls.