ライフサイエンスコーパス: daily living

1 e benchmark ROM, essential for activities of daily living.

2 n important role in performing activities of daily living.

3 nd self-reported ability to do activities of daily living.

4 ures of the ability to perform activities of daily living.

5 nd difficulty with one or more activities of daily living.

6 ensive care and assisting with activities of daily living.

7 tem to complete functional tasks relevant to daily living.

8 ugh to require help with usual activities of daily living.

9 an enhanced ability to perform activities of daily living.

10 uld greatly facilitate her/his activities of daily living.

11 nctions that are essential for activities of daily living.

12 ent on informal caregivers for activities of daily living.

13 equirement for assistance with activities of daily living.

14 f life, physical function, and activities of daily living.

15 hing, allowing them to perform activities of daily living.

16 rofound effect on instrumental activities of daily living.

17 hing, allowing them to perform activities of daily living.

18 arthritis, and limitations on activities of daily living.

19 syndrome, and 13% had loss of activities of daily living.

20 nges in pain intensity and interference with daily living.

21 of spatial neglect during the activities of daily living.

22 otor sequencing, switching and activities of daily living.

23 d voice volume, and slowing of activities of daily living.

24 terference with work and other activities of daily living.

25 nt pain, deformity and loss of activities of daily living.

26 nic kidney disease, and functional status in daily living.

27 rding their ability to perform activities of daily living.

28 t in functional improvement in activities of daily living.

29 tional status and autonomy for activities of daily living.

30 pate in other vision-dependent activities of daily living.

31 xterity have a major impact on activities of daily living.

32 might improve arm function and activities of daily living.

33 ralyzed individuals to perform many tasks of daily living.

34 d 16% had difficulty with >/=1 activities of daily living.

35 ients require caregivers for assistance with daily living.

36 ss, and boost participation in activities of daily living.

37 h >/=3 versus 0 limitations in activities of daily living, 1.36 (1.0-1.86) with moderate or severe ve

38 le score declines were 1.9 for activities of daily living, 1.7 for instrumental activities of daily l

39 4.33, P = .02) and (2) loss of activities of daily living (2.71; 95% CI, 1.07-6.84, P = .04).

40 pants similarly emphasized (1) activities of daily living, (2) visual symptoms, (3) treatment burden,

41 d goals focusing on achievable activities of daily living; 2) applying time-limited trials in certain

42 , 37% needed help for at least 1 activity of daily living, 20% screened positive for posttraumatic st

43 ical rehabilitation (61%), and activities of daily living (31%).

44 with at least 1 limitation in activities of daily living (59.6% versus 74.7%; P=0.001), or below the

45 ] to 64.1 [62.7-65.2], p=0.16; activities of daily living, 62.3 [61.6-63.0] to 64.6 [63.1-65.6], p<0.

46 ] to 64.3 [63.0-65.3], p=0.24; activities of daily living, 62.7 [62.1-63.3] to 65.0 [63.5-65.9], p<0.

47 -64.5], p=0.0416; instrumental activities of daily living, 63.0 [62.4-63.7] to 64.1 [62.7-65.2], p=0.

48 .6-65.7], p=0.01; instrumental activities of daily living, 63.5 [63.0-64.0] to 64.3 [63.0-65.3], p=0.

49 odds of impaired instrumental activities of daily living (95% CI: 1.6-6.3) compared to those reporti

50 adults with arthritis include the center of daily living, a lonely path, an inevitable and endless p

51 smoking status, limitations in activities of daily living, a wide range of chronic illnesses, and sel

52 gnition), the Interview for Deterioration in Daily Living Activities in Dementia (to assess function)

53 Similarly, Interview for Deterioration in Daily Living Activities in Dementia scores revealed more

54 ericiguat to Improve Physical Functioning in Daily Living Activities of Patients With Heart Failure a

55 observable functioning across four domains (daily living activities, cognitive, emotional control, i

56 the SF-12 questionnaire about limitations in daily living activities.

57 led or requiring assistance for at least one daily-living activity, with housekeeping, grocery shoppi

58 er's Disease Cooperative Study/Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) Inventory score (range, 0-78).

59 er's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale, on which scores range fro

60 ess dependence in instrumental activities of daily living (adjusted mean difference, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.

61 l impairment and impairment in activities of daily living (ADL) (defined as severe or moderate to sev

62 d the quality of life measures activities of daily living (ADL) and EQ-5D-3L index.

63 t Scale-Revised (IES-R), and the activity of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL) scales.

64 ted functional status based on activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL).

65 Daily Living (IADL) and basic Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and trajectories of dependency before

66 ery including Barthel index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and various tests of neurocognitive f

67 quality-of-life measures: the activities of daily living (ADL) part of the Friedreich's Ataxia Ratin

68 rease of >/= 0.5 points on the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) scale between the beginning of chemot

69 ght (m)(2)), and self-reported activities of daily living (ADL) were obtained.

70 Disabilities in basic activities of daily living (ADL) were present in 139 (32%) of 428 pati

71 rticipants with limitations in activities of daily living (ADL) were randomized to physiotherapy and

72 nant of the ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL), in older patients with asymptomatic

73 am, Timed Get Up and Go (GUG), Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Instrumental Activities in Daily Liv

74 vestigated: annual death rate, Activities of Daily Living (ADL), physical performance in three tests

75 s assessed with three metrics: activities of daily living (ADL), the Braden Scale, and the Morse fall

76 was available on self-reported Activities of Daily Living (ADL).

77 instrumental (IADL) and basic activities of daily living (ADL).

78 ed to ROM values necessary for activities of daily living (ADL).

79 Frailty, activities of daily living (ADL)/instrumental ADL (IADL) disability, C

80 cial situation, functionality (activities of daily living [ADL] + instrumental activities of daily li

81 health status, limitations in activities of daily living (ADLs) (ADLs and instrumental ADLs), emerge

82 and to determine the number of activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental ADLs (IADLs) for wh

83 Activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental ADLs (IADLs) were e

84 tatus with regard to mobility, activities of daily living (ADLs) and Modified Rankin Scale (MRS) scor

85 s an increase in the number of activities of daily living (ADLs) and/or instrumental activities of da

86 Functional Status survey of 5 activities of daily living (ADLs) at hospital admission and 3, 6, and

87 but they do neither represent activities of daily living (ADLs) nor fully reproduce patients' sympto

88 Difficulty with 9 activities of daily living (ADLs) was assessed by a questionnaire.

89 rized as (1) any disability in activities of daily living (ADLs), (2) any disability in instrumental

90 ory (NPI), ability to complete activities of daily living (ADLs), caregiver distress, cognitive safet

91 Impairment in activities of daily living (ADLs), defined as self-reported difficulty

92 y measures were assessed using activities of daily living (ADLs), falls, hand-grip, and chair-stands.

93 We modelled the effect of activities of daily living (ADLs), living conditions, occupational and

94 dependently and complete basic activities of daily living (ADLs).

95 current stimulation to improve activities of daily living (ADLs).

96 ncludes basic and instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs, IADLs), cognition (Mini-Cog test), h

97 ear risk of severe, persistent activities-of-daily-living (ADLs) disability, defined as dependence in

98 a disability scale (measuring activities of daily living [ADLs] and instrumental ADLs).

99 ttery), basic and instrumental activities of daily living (Alzheimer Disease Research Center IADLs),

100 , drug and/or alcohol use, and activities of daily living and a newly designed 20-minute computerized

101 s require more help with their activities of daily living and additional hours of close supervision p

102 iodical clinical reassessment, activities of daily living and care management.

103 of frailty with disability in activities of daily living and cognitive impairment.

104 of her instrumental and basic activities of daily living and denies falls.

105 jectories for both measures of activities of daily living and fewer emergency department visits than

106 estimating equations (for Katz activities of daily living and Functional Activities Questionnaire sco

107 f-care ability was measured by activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living

108 onal disability (P < 0.001 for activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living

109 al disability as determined by activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living

110 The Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living

111 rkinson's Disease Rating Scale Activities of Daily Living and Motor Exam ratings.

112 Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (activities of daily living and motor subsections), timed tests and Par

113 ical manifestations can impair activities of daily living and often linger for years.

114 self-reported difficulty with activities of daily living and prior hospitalizations.

115 vement for the AFEQT subscales Activities of Daily Living and Symptoms: 5.1 (2.5-7.6) and 7.1 (5.3-9.

116 tion maternal reports of perceived stress in daily living and the effect of stress on health were rec

117 ncreased odds of disability in activities of daily living and worse motor-sensory function in the fol

118 th instrumental activities and activities of daily living and, chronic disease-free life expectancy w

119 ations (basic and instrumental activities of daily living) and cognitive impairment after hospitaliza

120 daily living and instrumental activities of daily living), and (2) informal caregiving (hours of car

121 y), general functional status (Activities of Daily Living), and cardiac assessments.

122 PD (SCOPA)-motor examination, -activities of daily living, and -complications, and levodopa equivalen

123 's disease-motor examination, -activities of daily living, and -motor complications, and Parkinson's

124 y living, 1.7 for instrumental activities of daily living, and 2.2 for depressive symptoms; scores on

125 r more difficulties with the 5 activities of daily living, and 270 of 707 patients (38.2%) foresaw th

126 new functional limitation in an activity of daily living, and 59.1% have not returned to work.

127 ealth-related quality of life, activities of daily living, and anxiety and depression were recorded.

128 ivities of daily living, basic activities of daily living, and cognition.

129 with one or more instrumental activities of daily living, and difficulty with one or more activities

130 ction, motor nerve conduction, activities of daily living, and erectile function did not show a signi

131 ble to perform the majority of activities of daily living, and had a normal social life.

132 health, and ability to conduct activities of daily living, and increases in chronic pain and inabilit

133 simulate real-world scenarios/activities of daily living, and maximal effort.

134 of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, and mobility activities was commonplace am

135 of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, and mobility activities) and/or cognitive

136 es in mortality, disability in activities of daily living, and physical and cognitive functioning amo

137 ales, covering pain, symptoms, activities of daily living, and quality of life (KOOS4); scores range

138 rmance, cognitive instrumental activities of daily living, and recurrent depression.

139 ndency," "peripheral vision," "self-image," "daily living," and "driving" dimensions.

140 edications, and impact of visual function on daily living approximately 50% to 80% of the time.

141 Patients' activities of daily living are often affected although these can be am

142 nts was self-reported extended activities of daily living at 6 months, measured with the Nottingham E

143 being limited in instrumental activities of daily living at baseline, distance to the nearest ophtha

144 ts had disability in essential activities of daily living at the beginning of the study, and the leve

145 dependence in vision-dependent activities of daily living, avoidance of visual symptoms, and disease

146 sed vital status, instrumental activities of daily living, basic activities of daily living, and cogn

147 led at baseline in 4 essential activities of daily living: bathing, dressing, walking, and transferri

148 intolerance/hypotension during activities of daily living before or after spaceflight.

149 ursing (e.g., nursing aide for activities of daily living) care.

150 erate to severe limitations in activities of daily living (clinical functional score >/=2) should use

151 men's functional capacities in activities of daily living, cognition, and physical performance were w

152 iated with deletion carriers indicated worse daily living, communication, and social skills compared

153 Because typical activities of daily living comprise both continuous control tasks such

154 so created, with dependence in activities of daily living defined as S&E <80%.

155 tion score); and disability in activities of daily living (defined as none, mild, or moderate-severe)

156 Activity-of-daily-living dependencies decreased from an average of 6

157 daily living and instrumental activities of daily living), despite adjustment for covariates such as

158 tients' self-reported extended activities of daily living did not differ between groups at 6 months (

159 ctional impairments, including activities of daily living disability (17.0% versus 13.0%; P=0.013) an

160 : 20.6% versus 12.4%, P=0.001; activities of daily living disability, NSTEMI: 19.7% versus 11.4%, P<0

161 socioeconomics might compress activities of daily living disability, that is, benefits of success, b

162 3.8 to -4.0; p=0.0004), in the activities of daily living domain was -12.4 (-17.3 to -7.5; p<0.0001),

163 ced ability to perform routine activities of daily living due to vision loss is warranted.

164 itor data were obtained during activities of daily living during a 24-hour time period.

165 vement is also relevant to the activities of daily living during spontaneous behaviour.

166 a quantitative measure of the activities of daily living during spontaneous behaviour.

167 ty to perform vision-dependent activities of daily living (e.g., driving), maintaining visual functio

168 Additionally, it impairs activities of daily living (e.g., speaking, chewing, and swallowing).

169 g conditions (eg, dual-tasking, turning, and daily living) enhanced sensitivity of gait quantificatio

170 ces) that quantify mobility in unsupervised, daily living environments are emerging as complementary

171 orthostatic hypotension during activities of daily living, especially when measured on a beat-to-beat

172 ty, functional independence in activities of daily living, excellent functional outcome (mRS 0-1), an

173 , difficulty with Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, exhaustion, and low physical activity (P <

174 impaired ability to carry out activities of daily living, falls, prolonged recovery time after hospi

175 chronic diseases and impaired activities of daily living, faster walking speed, and favorable object

176 ing higher scores for Pain interference with daily living for up to 2 years after random assignment.

177 ate significant differences in activities of daily living function changes for residents in the Green

178 The mean activities of daily living function showed deterioration over time, an

179 Four different activities of daily living function trajectories were identified for 1

180 The outcome was activities of daily living function, and the main independent variable

181 sment Method for the ICU, Katz activities of daily living, Functional Activities Questionnaire (measu

182 atus (Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living >/=4) and nutritional status (absence of ca

183 d that disability according to activities of daily living had significantly reduced annually between

184 cupational therapy can improve activities of daily living; however, information about the clinical ef

185 Score (mRS>2) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL<8) and cognitive performance were cal

186 /=1 impairment in Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) (aOR = 2.57, 95% CI: 0.97, 6.78).

187 ical structure of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) and basic Activities of Daily Living

188 s, as measured by instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and gait speed, may be an important

189 e performance and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) in community-living older persons.

190 the Lawton-Brody Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) Questionnaire.

191 27/30 in 31%, and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) showed impairment in 34% of the pati

192 ily Living (ADL), Instrumental Activities in Daily Living (IADL), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA),

193 ed by gait speed, instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), modified Rankin Scale, and NIH Stro

194 sed limitations in independent activities of daily living (IADL), or mortality were combined.

195 ly living [ADL] + instrumental activities of daily living [IADL]), cognition, depression, and nutriti

196 ing (ADLs) and/or instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) requiring assistance from baseline.

197 ways to disrupted instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs).

198 e dependencies in instrumental activities of daily living ("impaired physical function") in patients

199 of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living), improvement and severity (Clinical Global

200 the patients and impairment of activities of daily living in 28.3% of patients.

201 -related aberration changes on activities of daily living in DED.

202 inesia, motor fluctuations and activities of daily living in off periods remain improved at 5 years,

203 evel on basic and instrumental activities of daily living in pre- and post-liver transplant patients.

204 tory-based movement studies to activities of daily living in real world settings.

205 used to determine the impact of nystagmus on daily living in terms of both physical and psychosocial

206 s a loss in ability to perform activities of daily living including a loss of independent ambulation.

207 ture of older age that impacts activities of daily living, independence, and integration in modern so

208 west limitations to performing activities of daily living independently.

209 ency was measured using the Katz Activity of Daily Living index, and neuropsychiatric symptoms were a

210 amination), functional status (activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living),

211 Newly acquired disability in activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, a

212 ing disability outcomes (i.e., activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, a

213 al outcome (mean difference in activities of daily living/instrumental activities of daily living sco

214 r's Disease Co-operative Study-Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL) scales from baseline a

215 er's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Inventory; ADCS-ADL), and model the relatio

216 parkinsonian motor disability, activities of daily living, levodopa-induced motor complications (as a

217 depressed (odds ratio 1.35 per activities of daily living limitation of sepsis survivor, 95% confiden

218 ty, the need for assistance in activities of daily living, makes paraplegia an important target for p

219 nnaire (measuring instrumental activities of daily living), Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form

220 ears, with a Myasthenia Gravis-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) score of 6 or more, Myasthenia Gra

221 culated based on limitation in activities of daily living, mobility limitation, comorbidity, cognitiv

222 but reported problems with motor aspects of daily living more frequently.

223 h regard to ability to perform activities of daily living (n = 391, r = -0.54, P < .001), emotional w

224 me was the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) Scale score at 3 months after rando

225 d with the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale.

226 including open field activity, activities of daily living (nesting and marble burying), at the effect

227 he number of difficulties with activities of daily living (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6), an

228 iated with disability in basic activities of daily living or with cognition.

229 bility (OR, 1.4), and impaired activities of daily living (OR, 1.8) were independently associated wit

230 % CI, 1.37-4.38), instrumental activities of daily living (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.37-4.38), as well as l

231 al function domains, including activities of daily living (OR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.37-4.38), instrumental

232 (95% CI 1.08-1.35), P = 0.001] and stress in daily living [OR 1.16 (1.03-1.30), P = 0.014] were assoc

233 y (difficulty with one or more activities of daily living) or death up to 2025, by use of evidence-ba

234 limitations in one instrumental activity of daily living, or slow gait speed.

235 ysical components (P = 0.030), activities of daily living (P = 0.001), mini nutritional assessment (P

236 of disability in instrumental activities of daily living (P = 0.04 at 3 mo and P = 0.002 at 12 mo).

237 to motor disability (P<0.001), activities of daily living (P<0.001), levodopa-induced motor complicat

238 joint swelling and tenderness, activities of daily living, patient global assessment, recurrence, int

239 In contrast, measures of activity of daily living performance, executive function and tests o

240 the loss of function/preserved activities of daily living' profile, a more detailed geriatric assessm

241 e loss of function and altered activities of daily living' profile, therapeutic strategies should be

242 ant/disease-specific outcomes, activities of daily living, quality of life, global impression of chan

243 [CI], -175 to -43), London Chest Activity of Daily Living Questionnaire = 18 (95% CI, 7-30), and St.

244 lk distance (6MWD), London Chest Activity of Daily Living Questionnaire, and quality of life were ass

245 elated measure of instrumental activities of daily living (r = -0.60) (P < .001 for both).

246 It facilitates every major activity of daily living ranging from basic communication, mobility

247 Improvement in activities of daily living, recognition tasks, and assessments of ligh

248 ere assessed on 5 preoperative activities of daily living recommended by the American College of Surg

249 Furthermore, the level of activities of daily living recovery of these neglect patients was brou

250 ontribute to exaggerated BP responses during daily living, resulting in repetitive increments in load

251 isease Cooperative Study Group Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADCS ADL); performance-based measure

252 isease Cooperative Study Group Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADCS ADL); performance-based measure

253 er's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living scale (ADCS-ADL; range, 0 to 78, with lower

254 n the SMMSE and on the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS, on which scores range from 0

255 e (H-Y) and Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living Scale (S&E).

256 Index, the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale as well as recovery from apraxia.

257 tionnaire, Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale), potential prediagnostic motor (hypo

258 vities Questionnaire, and Katz Activities of Daily Living Scale).

259 , measured by the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scale, and 3 subscales of community-level s

260 mary Index, Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living scale, and ambulatory capacity.

261 d Chinese version Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scale, respectively.

262 Daily Living and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scales and the Physical Component Summary o

263 n), and functional disability (activities of daily living scales, Pfeffer Functional Activities Quest

264 s of daily living/instrumental activities of daily living score = 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]

265 ioration in the UPDRS part II (activities of daily living) score (mean baseline, 0.00; mean follow-up

266 tion was associated with worse activities of daily living scores (p = 0.002) over the course of the 1

267 ciated with worse instrumental activities of daily living scores (p = 0.15) or worse Medical Outcomes

268 (PSPRS) and Schwab and England Activities of Daily Living (SEADL) scale at up to 52 weeks.

269 sequential processes that are necessary for daily living.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT We perform sequences

270 ge of motion and progressed to activities of daily living, sitting, standing, and walking as tolerate

271 al regressions in the subgroup revealed that daily living skills were predicted by the presence of an

272 comprising communication, socialization, and daily living skills.

273 h impact being most evident on activities of daily living, social activities, and mobility.

274 In daily living spaces, ambient intelligence could prolong

275 stionnaire, summary index, and activities of daily living subscale; and version 2 of the 12-item Shor

276 Other aspects of their activities of daily living such as schooling, professional, and social

277 Care workers ration support in activities of daily living, such as eating, drinking, elimination and

278 n discharge and 6 months, Katz activities-of-daily-living summary score improved by 64.4%; improvemen

279 arent-reported improvements in activities of daily living supported these findings.

280 re likely to have a decline in activities of daily living than those without insomnia (23% vs 9%; P =

281 ce Scale score (which measures activities of daily living); the Total Functional Capacity scale; the

282 Disease Rating Scale Nonmotor Experiences of Daily Living, the original Unified Parkinson's Disease R

283 ptoms and ability to undertake activities of daily living), UMSARS II (neurological motor evaluation)

284 e assessments further included activities of daily living (UPDRS-II), motor complications (UPDRS-IV),

285 daily living and instrumental activities of daily living using the Chinese Barthel Index and Chinese

286 recovery of neglect and of the activities of daily living was accelerated only in cTBS responders.

287 patial neglect symptoms in the activities of daily living was also generally accompanied by significa

288 efit to cognitive instrumental activities of daily living was also observed (treatment x time interac

289 ystolic BP distribution during activities of daily living was characterized by skewness and kurtosis.

290 a nonvalidated 10-item test of activities of daily living was seen.

291 A 10-item test simulating activities of daily living was used to evaluate patients' functionalit

292 measure of pain, function, and activities of daily living, was the primary outcome measure.

293 eatment-related limitations in activities of daily living were greater with surgery than with observa

294 lic, and ePAD pressures during activities of daily living were higher than the ranges of these values

295 ns cited for desiring PAD were activities of daily living were not enjoyable (89.7%) and losses of au

296 ld, visual search, reading and activities of daily living were performed before and after each interv

297 ns, psychosocial function, and activities of daily living were pooled separately for mild cognitive i

298 t orthostatic tolerance during activities of daily living, when it is most clinically relevant.

299 ic gait improves endurance for activities of daily living while promoting cognition and mood.

300 e the hemodynamic responses to activities of daily living with symptom-limited upright exercise.