The MROC was created to address the problem of frequent fractures among patients treated with glucocorticoids.
To meet this need, the MROC was developed by a nephrology nurse, a rheumatologist, and a clinical renal pharmacist.
One of the most important ideas in planning the MROC was to provide comprehensive patient education.
The laboratory assessment of the patients in the MROC may be partially completed prior to the clinic visit.
The nephrology nurse coordinates the patient's BMD study with other medical appointments when possible, prior to the visit to the MROC. Patients with suspected fractures have x-rays of the injuries prior to clinic.
The MROC algorithm used in this study is listed in the Appendix.
ROC/ROC, SC/ROC, MSC/ROC, BEA and SC-Seed are not significantly differently from each other, but are significantly better than MROC, and
MROC is the second best algorithm, while SC/SC is the worst solution algorithm.
Two such algorithms were the BEA and MROC algorithms.
The MROC also directed three initial efforts for E-LMR: (1) Field two transportable E-LMR systems that provide interoperable communication capabilities with federal, state and local authorities for Marine Corps first responder and operating forces support outside the installation radio coverage areas; (2) Field an Immediate Interoperable Solution (IIS) that provides interoperability with off-base authorities using the existing installation LMR systems; and (3) Priority fielding of E-LMR to Camp Pendleton and the Marine Corps National Capital Region (MCNCR) that includes Marine Corps Base (MCB) Quantico.
The third immediate effort directed by the MROC is the fielding of E-LMR to Camp Pendleton and MCNCR.
(a) Evaluation criteria AccuROC Analyse-It CMDT GraphROC Data input (10), % 7 10 6 4 Data output (15), % 8 11 6 8 Analysis results Correctness (40), % 40 40 40 40 Completeness (20), % 20 15 12 17 Software comfort (10), % 5 10 3 6 Manual (5), % 5 5 3 3 Final score, % 85 91 70 78 ++ Evaluation criteria MedCalc mROC
ROCKIT SPSS Data input (10), % 10 4 3 10 Data output (15), % 7 6 5 6 Analysis results Correctness (40), % 40 40 40 40 Completeness (20), % 14 10 15 11 Software comfort (10), % 9 5 4 5 Manual (5), % 4 3 3 2 Final score, % 84 68 70 74 (a) Values are related to the respective evaluation criterion with the maximum values shown in parentheses.