ライフサイエンスコーパス: functional assessment

1 the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (a global functional assessment).

2 s model facilitates imaging and quantitative functional assessment.

3 entiation, based on both marker analysis and functional assessment.

4 e and post TAC end points for structural and functional assessment.

5 us MAF2 gene and its paralogues, confounding functional assessment.

6 ion of advanced stage fibrosis and providing functional assessment.

7 the absence of a non-invasive technique for functional assessment.

8 derived ECM by mass spectrometry followed by functional assessment.

9 ing with opportunities for both anatomic and functional assessment.

10 rentially expressed genes for validation and functional assessment.

11 nt EAP, cognitive, and thorough clinical and functional assessment.

12 quired regarding cell seeding strategies and functional assessment.

13 cestry, followed by extensive biological and functional assessment.

14 in dysfunction by particle size, number, and functional assessment.

15 interviews with informants and patients, and functional assessments.

16 mia; and (iii) combine histopathological and functional assessments.

17 enrolled subjects had baseline cognitive and functional assessments.

18 evaluated using diagnostic, symptomatic, and functional assessments.

19 burden and self-reported and examiner-rated functional assessments.

20 rms to compare trajectories of GSL, QBA, and functional assessments.

21 2 years on 6 muscles unilaterally along with functional assessments.

22 Functional assessments (6-minute walk distance, 4-meter

23 Clinical and functional assessments along with transcranial magnetic

24 Clinical and functional assessment, along with motor-nerve excitabili

25 g daily donepezil on the Alzheimer's Disease Functional Assessment and Change Scale.

26 stoperative cine MRI for global and regional functional assessment and delayed-enhancement MRI for as

27 223 respondents had a baseline cognitive and functional assessment and had linked Medicare claims; 51

28 e resolution to select a specific region for functional assessment and interferometric phase sensitiv

29 rmation enabled experimental recapitulation, functional assessment and mechanistic elucidation of the

30 ocardial recovery and should be targeted for functional assessment and optimization.

31 tients with MS, and 10 controls for clinical functional assessments and quantitative imaging, includi

32 adequate perioperative risk stratification, functional assessment, and oncologic prognostication, el

33 Here we use synthetic chemistry, functional assessment, and structure-based analysis to e

34 iagnostic findings, including morphological, functional assessment, and treatment of patients with MB

35 These parameters may be useful alongside functional assessments as the outcome measurements for f

36 a thorough medical and occupational history, functional assessment, assessment of sensitization, incl

37 econdary outcomes were safety, survival, and functional assessment at hospital discharge and at 3 mon

38 These studies relied on the functional assessment, based on clinical score, of condi

39 often involve an ordinal scale of subjective functional assessments but the optimal way to quantify r

40 nocytochemical staining in kidney slices and functional assessments (Ca(2+) imaging) in isolated, spl

41 le analyses such as Mendelian randomization, functional assessment, co localization, genetic risk sco

42 integrity and RA is an optimal parameter for functional assessment compared with axial or radial diff

43 rain natriuretic peptide and Troponin T, and functional assessment comprising the 6-minute walk test

44 rthermore, the combination of anatomical and functional assessments configuring a hybrid approach may

45 Functional assessment confirmed at least two compounds a

46 Follow-on pathological and functional assessment confirmed cyclin D1 and SPP1 as ke

47 included pain (visual analogue scale score), functional assessment (Constant-Murley score), and resol

48 onal study, MRI and (1)H MR spectroscopy and functional assessment data were acquired from participan

49 Early functional assessment (day 1 after acute myocardial infa

50 Furthermore, a combined anatomical and functional assessment does not add incremental diagnosti

51 cer patients with fatigue as measured by the Functional Assessment for Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigu

52 as measured using the 0 to 10 scale, and the Functional Assessment for Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigu

53 to GSL, and both appear more sensitive than functional assessments for detecting muscle deterioratio

54 In silico functional assessment further supported this relationshi

55 or the diagnosis of cirrhosis, and providing functional assessment in advanced stage disease.

56 hearing assessment and treatment as part of functional assessment in an interdisciplinary, team-base

57 ue to provide improved means of anatomic and functional assessment in children and adults with congen

58 In vitro functional assessment in HEK293 cells of the impact of t

59 Functional assessment in patient-derived xenograft mouse

60 The primary functional assessment in this study was the 6-Minute Wal

61 a, alongside any role in tumorigenesis using functional assessments in mouse and human models.

62 Functional assessments included the Barthel Index, the L

63 d stroma regions, respectively, and combined functional assessments, including cancer cell migration,

64 lts obtained from in vitro and in vivo islet functional assessment indicated that islets isolated usi

65 Conclusion: Murine LV functional assessment is feasible with high spatial and

66 Functional assessment is still required in lesions of mo

67 structive coronary artery disease (CAD), but functional assessment is warranted in the presence of a

68 LFDR complements functional assessments like gene set enrichment analysis

69 A multimodal functional assessment may be more effective in detecting

70 ing culture systems, preclinical models, and functional assessment, may improve clinical application

71 hours active per day and changes in standard functional assessments (New York Heart Association, qual

72 Functional assessment of 16 OATP-C alleles in vitro reve

73 e entire coronary tree, may be ideal for TAG functional assessment of a coronary arterial stenosis.

74 we show that lipid-dependent structural and functional assessment of a membrane protein can be condu

75 in addition to biomarker-based segregation, functional assessment of a patient's tumor before treatm

76 -chip technology with human patch-clamp in a functional assessment of a previously undescribed Nav1.7

77 Assessment Scale, and quality of life by the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy (FAAC

78 The Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy quest

79 In contrast, 4-week Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy score

80 lt to measure in human tumor samples, making functional assessment of autophagy problematic in a clin

81 ed knockdown in skin organotypic culture and functional assessment of barrier parameters, mass spectr

82 tive coronary angiography does not provide a functional assessment of CAD as available from pressure

83 11-item neurotoxicity (NTX) component of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) -Taxane s

84 ctive of treatment arm) had a mean change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) fatigue s

85 ful decline in quality of life (QOL) via the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Lung Canc

86 significant improvement was shown in median Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Prostate

87 (EuroQol-5D), and cancer-specific outcomes (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy and Social Diffi

88 The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy and Uniscale ins

89 utcome was self-reported cognitive function (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Cognitive Functi

90 Criteria, and patient-reported QOL using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for Patients wit

91 fety, time to deterioration in scores on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Hepatobiliary Sy

92 rapy quality-of-life (QOL) metrics using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom I

93 rted outcomes (PROs) were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom I

94 Events and peripheral neuropathy by modified Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy questionnaire an

95 study by patient-reported symptoms using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale/Gynecologi

96 usion [8 weeks only]), FACT-B, FACT-ES, (and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy subscales of phy

97 ompleted the colorectal cancer module of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy survey (FACT-C).

98 Changes in QOL (eg, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy) from before ran

99 l Outcomes Study SF-36) and cancer-specific (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy) scales.

100 ts from clinical trials, we administered the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An)

101 d patient-reported outcomes according to the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An)

102 d anemia and fatigue were evaluated with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia and Funct

103 lity of life) and the anemia subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia questionn

104 Patients completed cancer-specific QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Biologic Respons

105 a 12% absolute difference between groups in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Tran

106 Main Outcomes and Measures: Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Tran

107 tem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Tran

108 lity of life after transplantation using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Tran

109 nt Health Questionnaire, PTSD checklist, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Tran

110 Quality of life, as assessed by using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Pain (FACT-

111 t-reported quality of life assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain (FACT-Br)

112 The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B)

113 Patients completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B)

114 Scale (MSAS)-Global Distress Index (GDI) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B)

115 file of Mood States (POMS; primary outcome), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B),

116 l QOL; health-related QOL as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer (F

117 apy relative to usual care were recorded for Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast, social/f

118 s (12-item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12], Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cervical [FACT-C

119 uality-of-life endpoint was the score on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cervix Trial Out

120 oup of 552 evaluable women using the 37-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Functi

121 age-matched noncancer controls completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Functi

122 at baseline and 1 year postoperatively: the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT

123 We measured HRQL with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT

124 QoL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT

125 with LRRC using the Brief Pain Inventory and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal quest

126 Patients also completed quality-of-life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Sympto

127 nt decrease in levels of endocrine symptoms (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Sympto

128 ssessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Sympto

129 Patient-reported measures included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)

130 scopy patients reported significantly higher Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)

131 QOL measures included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)

132 tus and health-related quality of life using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)

133 te QOL assessments at four time points using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)

134 r Therapy Kidney Symptom Index-19 (FKSI-19), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)

135 HRQOL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G)

136 significant mean difference of 9.8 units in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (primary

137 The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General instrume

138 quality of life as measured by the change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Measure

139 d the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General quality-

140 were patient HRQL over time, measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General question

141 from baseline to week 12, per scoring by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale.

142 lysis of variance method was used to compare Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scores o

143 ns Questionnaire), coping (Brief COPE), QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General), and mo

144 Participants completed assessments of QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General), depres

145 gnificant improvement in QOL as shown by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, compare

146 QOL improvement rates (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head & Neck tota

147 The mean Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck Tr

148 Quality of life (QOL) was assessed using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck.

149 onal Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck.

150 The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Hepatobiliary (F

151 he development and initial validation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Hepatobiliary (F

152 Measurement of quality of life using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Hepatobiliary qu

153 nificantly higher overall mean scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom I

154 nterim analysis, HRQoL was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom I

155 ate by the Lung Cancer Subscale (LCS) of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) qu

156 baseline and at 12 weeks with the use of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) sc

157 dictive ability of the five subscales of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (physical,

158 Changes in QOL over time (measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnai

159 QoL-5D (EQ-5D), and Melanoma Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M

160 varian Cancer Module 28 (EORTC QLQ-OV28) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Cancer s

161 and quality of life were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Symptom

162 d at baseline and during treatment using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P

163 (UCLA-PCI), including Short Form (SF)-36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P

164 lth-related quality of life (HRQoL) with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P

165 atient-reported outcomes, assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P

166 The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P

167 orm (BPI-SF), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P

168 l analogue scale [EQ-5D-FL, EQ-VAS], and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate [FACT-P

169 a prostate cancer-specific checklist or the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate questio

170 ant deterioration in both arms over time for Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate total s

171 quality of life (QoL), assessed by using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate.

172 The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Trial Outcome In

173 The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Onco

174 t baseline and after every two cycles by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Onco

175 The questionnaire, referred to as the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Onco

176 IPN-sx were evaluated with the self-reported Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Onco

177 This was confirmed by the results of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment questionnaire.

178 ration in quality of life as measured by the Functional Assessment Of Cancer Treatment--Breast were c

179 er" alleles and underscore the importance of functional assessment of candidate disease alleles.

180 iding an efficient tool for the recovery and functional assessment of candidate genes.

181 tructural immunohistochemical analysis and a functional assessment of cellular coupling with a GJ-per

182 mmalian cells, and suggest an avenue for the functional assessment of chromatin-associated proteins.

183 Fatigue was measured using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)

184 The primary outcome was change in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)

185 s (FACT-Trial Outcome Index [TOI]), fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy [FACIT]

186 Short Form-36], and cancer-related fatigue [Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue

187 es, the Short Form 36 vitality subscale, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue

188 Secondary and other endpoints included the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy fatigue

189 Quality of life was measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy for Pal

190 36, Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-HCV, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

191 r PRO questionnaires (Short Form-36 [SF-36], Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

192 of placebo (PL) on CRF as measured using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

193 ESC), Unified Myoclonus Rating Scale (UMRS), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

194 outcomes, including fatigue measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

195 Additional end points included scores on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

196 For this quantitative study, we selected the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

197 with respect to vitality, as assessed by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

198 (36) Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue

199 SMD, 0.18 [95% CI, -0.24 to 0.61]; I2 = 87%; Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliat

200 estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliat

201 Questionnaire (KCCQ) overall summary and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliat

202 5 versus 36.2, respectively; P=0.04) but not Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliat

203 estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-palliat

204 s of standardised instruments, including the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-spiritu

205 The primary end point was change in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness-Fatigue (FACIT-

206 (CREST-seq), for the unbiased discovery and functional assessment of cis-regulatory sequences in the

207 drug screening, diagnostic applications and functional assessment of complex membrane proteins like

208 try, fluorescent dye diffusion technique for functional assessment of connexin43, telemetry monitorin

209 s the established reference standard for the functional assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) (

210 entially be used for improved anatomical and functional assessment of coronary artery disease at a re

211 A provide comparable diagnostic accuracy for functional assessment of coronary artery stenosis.

212 may provide the best diagnostic accuracy for functional assessment of coronary artery stenosis.

213 low reserve (FFR) is a reliable tool for the functional assessment of coronary stenoses.

214 immunohistochemistry staining for Cx43, and functional assessment of Cx43 with fluorescent dye diffu

215 fects of genetic variation and may allow for functional assessment of disease-associated loci.

216 Functional assessment of each variant shows that loss-of

217 Functional assessment of endogenous IL1RA activity in 3

218 oietic progenitor cells, a comprehensive and functional assessment of entirely in vitro generated CD8

219 Because this GTI provides a more functional assessment of gas trapping and airway disease

220 peptide YY plasma concentration with bedside functional assessment of gastric emptying.

221 Functional assessment of gated individual dermal microve

222 The functional assessment of genes with increased expression

223 s, SAS mutational libraries can expedite the functional assessment of genetic variation.

224 As a functional assessment of GSK-3beta phosphorylation, TLR4

225 Functional assessment of hiPSC-CMs was determined by mul

226 Functional assessment of HIV-specific T cells by multipa

227 are essential and instructive modalities for functional assessment of human genetic variations.

228 Here we have presented the first functional assessment of IDE in AD families showing the

229 range detectors of unknown threat agents and functional assessment of identified agents.

230 This study highlights that functional assessment of identified nucleotide changes i

231 Functional assessment of IL-4 expression was also perfor

232 Functional assessment of iMGLs reveals that they secrete

233 es and ranked the genes and loci for further functional assessment of known cancer risk loci.

234 for the label-free isolation and downstream functional assessment of leukocytes from 50 mul of perip

235 Functional assessment of miR-31 activity revealed its ab

236 of high-throughput, unbiased approaches for functional assessment of most noncoding variants has bot

237 findings of computed tomography, based on a functional assessment of myocardial blood flow, thereby

238 Functional assessment of NCC by using thiazide-sensitive

239 might serve as a useful imaging tool for the functional assessment of neuroblastic tumors.

240 Identification and functional assessment of new Nav1.9 mutations will help

241 Functional assessment of nonsynonymous variant supported

242 ing is a promising noninvasive technique for functional assessment of renal allografts.

243 dscape of human SAN-like pacemaker cells and functional assessment of SAN-specific REs potentially in

244 Functional assessment of skinned myocytes, however, reve

245 Functional assessment of specific sequences that contrib

246 Functional assessment of structural analogs of the proto

247 Here, we provide a detailed functional assessment of the AON afferents to piriform i

248 ment and find monetary rewards, allowing the functional assessment of the brain systems for spatial l

249 or new and improved model systems that allow functional assessment of the corresponding gene products

250 Compromised QOL provides a functional assessment of the effects of chronic GVHD, an

251 ESTs are in the Gateway vector to facilitate functional assessment of the genes.

252 ing can provide both a detailed anatomic and functional assessment of the pediatric genitourinary tra

253 the role of urodynamics, particularly in the functional assessment of the urethra, it is clear that t

254 cross-sectional questionnaire, including the Functional Assessment of Therapy-Colorectal Cancer Surve

255 Functional assessment of these antibodies yielded an inh

256 sferase-mediated dUTP nick end labeling, and functional assessment of ventricular performance.

257 luding use of sensitive analytical tools for functional assessments of biofilm formation, riboflavin

258 Most functional assessments of CcpA, including interaction wi

259 Functional assessments of CD8(+) cells sorted into disti

260 , we combined global repertoire analyses and functional assessments of isolated T cell receptors (TCR

261 connectivity have been readily established, functional assessments of lower motor neuron (LMN) inner

262 matically segmented from K1 images to derive functional assessments of LV mass (mLV) and wall thickne

263 Functional assessments of NADSYN1 missense variants, thr

264 Structural, biochemical, and functional assessments of pulmonary vessels, including i

265 These data suggest that functional assessments of single Abs may inaccurately pr

266 Functional assessments of strength, balance and motor co

267 g to cognitive control of action, but direct functional assessments of this telencephalic nucleus are

268 tion of a membrane protein, which allows for functional assessments of various peptide regions.

269 y interpreted in the context of an extensive functional assessment, or family segregation analysis of

270 1-(13)C]pyruvate MRSI provides a noninvasive functional assessment primarily of MCT1 as a clinical bi

271 Decline in scores on the Functional Assessment Questionnaire and Trail Making Tes

272 n an everyday functional activities measure (Functional Assessment Questionnaire) was considerably la

273 In vitro functional assessment revealed that the A516C and A404T

274 as assessed through the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale (CAFAS).

275 (LPF) using the SMFA (short musculoskeletal functional assessment) score and discuss the results in

276 ab or sham arms for changes from baseline in functional assessment scores.

277 ew of all available information, including a functional assessment screen.

278 Functional assessment showed durable improvement in vest

279 A functional assessment showed good agreement with standar

280 Functional assessment showed reduced surface expression

281 Functional assessment shows no significant loss of perip

282 was compared with the cut point of 7c on the Functional Assessment Staging (FAST) scale.

283 ncluded comprehensive neuropsychological and functional assessment, structural MRI (3 T), diffusion t

284 proANP levels performed with replication and functional assessment that identified genetic variants i

285 ts in patients, starting with phenotypic and functional assessments that lead to analysis of candidat

286 y based treatments, specifically the rise of functional assessment; the recognition that pharmacother

287 ly distant species for genetic screening and functional assessment to identify modifiers of neurodege

288 We hypothesized that combining functional assessment to perfusion enhances the ability

289 be complemented by additional structural and functional assessments to minimize the risk of false rea

290 ised 3 phases: first, epicardial endothelial functional assessment using intracoronary acetylcholine;

291 thdrawal using RNA-sequencing, and performed functional assessment using slice electrophysiology.

292 Functional assessments using Langendorff preparations an

293 Functional assessment was performed by the use of an in

294 ell transplantation, MRI, and neurocognitive functional assessments, we demonstrate that bone marrow-

295 Cognitive and functional assessments were also performed.

296 Symptom and functional assessments were analysed at 7 days, 30 days,

297 Neuropsychological and functional assessments were carried out at study entry a

298 s underwent MR imaging of the affected knee, functional assessment with use of the International Knee

299 ed to a conservative strategy of noninvasive functional assessment, with angiography reserved for pat

300 ined from physical examination, imaging, and functional assessment, with genetic information allows f