ライフサイエンスコーパス: hazards model

1 0.78; P = 0.006 by adjusted Cox proportional-hazards model).

2 ion) were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model.

3 -rank test and a supportive Cox proportional hazards model.

4 isk was estimated through a Cox proportional hazards model.

5 splant-free survival with a Cox proportional hazards model.

6 ly relevant covariates in a Cox proportional hazards model.

7 tratified log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model.

8 (OS) were assessed with the Cox proportional hazards model.

9 nd stroke was analyzed in a cox proportional hazards model.

10 do a survival GWAS using a Cox proportional hazards model.

11 d Fine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazards models.

12 alyzed using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models.

13 5% CIs were calculated with Cox proportional hazards models.

14 lan-Meier and multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards models.

15 stimated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.

16 recurrence with the use of Cox proportional-hazards models.

17 ssessed using multiadjusted Cox proportional hazards models.

18 sing multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models.

19 mated HRs and 95% CIs using Cox proportional hazards models.

20 was analyzed using time-varying proportional hazards models.

21 regnancy was modelled using Cox proportional hazards models.

22 stimated with multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

23 alyses were performed using Cox proportional hazards models.

24 ry, were summarized by marginal proportional hazards models.

25 d ratios were derived using Cox Proportional Hazards models.

26 cted cubic splines based on Cox proportional hazards models.

27 essed using distributed-lag Cox proportional hazards models.

28 C statistic from unadjusted Cox proportional hazards models.

29 nt CVD using random-effects Cox proportional hazards models.

30 e estimated from cause-specific proportional hazards models.

31 ime of prison release using Cox proportional hazards models.

32 using linear, logistic, or Cox proportional hazards models.

33 Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models.

34 and Fine & Gray proportional subdistribution hazards models.

35 ratios were calculated with Cox proportional hazards models.

36 timated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

37 ident all-cause mortality using proportional hazards models.

38 5% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.

39 lity was investigated using Cox proportional hazards models.

40 separately, using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models.

41 xamined with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models.

42 cases) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.

43 and linear regression, and Cox proportional hazards models.

44 pilepsy were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models.

45 ea-based deprivation) using Cox proportional hazards models.

46 eloping breast cancer using Cox proportional hazards models.

47 (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.

48 ife tables and time-varying Cox proportional hazards models.

49 l after ALS diagnosis using Cox proportional hazards models.

50 alyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazards models.

51 cted cubic splines based on Cox proportional hazards models.

52 g propensity score-weighted Cox proportional hazards models.

53 ing logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models.

54 S and OS was analyzed using Cox proportional-hazards models.

55 pregnancy was modeled using Cox proportional hazards models.

56 factors determined by using Cox proportional hazards models.

57 sing spatial random-effects Cox proportional hazards models.

58 Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models.

59 biopsy was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models.

60 vel regression analyses and Cox Proportional-Hazards Models.

61 ular death was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards modeling.

62 urvival were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards modeling.

63 h ALI were identified using Cox proportional hazards modeling.

64 ith hazard ratios (HRs) and Cox proportional hazards modeling.

65 ee survival was assessed by Cox proportional hazards modeling.

66 e intervals using multivariable proportional hazards modeling.

67 ing Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards modeling.

68 lan-Meier survival analysis and proportional hazards modeling.

69 mic position (wealth) using Cox proportional hazards modelling.

70 bloodstream infection using Cox proportional hazards modelling.

71 to 11.7; hazard ratio in a Cox proportional-hazards model, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.18; P<0.001 by th

72 ke, and heart failure using Cox proportional hazards modeling, 5-year AF discrimination using C indic

73 standard and time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models accounting for competing risk of death.

74 Kaplan-Meier method, and a Cox proportional-hazards model adjusted for baseline differences.

75 A Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for known clinical predictors sho

76 mortality was assessed with Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, sex, AMD severity, VA,

77 We used Cox-proportional hazards models adjusted for age, sex, location and comor

78 Calculations were based on proportional hazards models adjusted for age, sex, race, HIV risk gro

79 r death were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, sex, region of enrollme

80 urvival were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, stage, grade, treatment

81 lity using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for baseline comorbidities and i

82 We used Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for individual, household, and c

83 er and Nutrition (EPIC) and Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for other risk factors.

84 tat versus allopurinol in a Cox proportional hazards model (adjusted for the stratification variable

85 ociated with mortality in a Cox proportional hazards model (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.2, 95%CI

86 5% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age, sex, calendar year, an

87 ratios were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, marita

88 We used Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for high-dimensional propensity

89 valuated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for individual- and census trac

90 posure were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for potential confounders.

91 Using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for sociodemographic factors, l

92 Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for the first 5 principal compo

93 admission, we constructed a Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for age, sex, race, and comorbid

94 Specifically, in a Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for multiple potential confounde

95 A Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for race, gender, route of use,

96 In Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for age, smoking, and other fac

97 idence intervals (CIs) from Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for baseline prognostic factors

98 qNight using random-effects Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for individual- and census trac

99 s of HF and related events, Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for region and baseline history

100 retransplant-free survival via proportional hazards modeling, adjusting for age, gender, and transpl

101 imated using random effects Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for personal- and neighborhood

102 uted for hip fracture using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for potential confounders.

103 and 34 years of age using a Cox proportional hazards model and an Aalen hazards difference model.

104 The Cox proportional-hazards model and Kaplan-Meier curve were used to evalua

105 yield results comparable to Cox proportional hazards model and kernel Cox regression.

106 stroke were assessed with a Cox proportional hazards model and propensity-score matching, respectivel

107 Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling and propensity score-matched analysis w

108 aluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling and propensity score-matched analysis.

109 culated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models and area under the curve analysis.

110 AMI was evaluated by using Cox proportional hazards models and area under the receiver operating cha

111 n cancer was estimated with Cox proportional hazards models and further adjusted for known ovarian ca

112 We fit proportional hazards models and hierarchical linear regression models

113 Cox proportional-hazards models and log-rank tests assessed the impact of

114 survival were assessed via Cox proportional-hazards models and multivariate generalized linear model

115 We applied Cox proportional-hazards models and pooled hazard ratios (HRs) using rand

116 ratios were obtained using Cox proportional hazards models, and a range of relevant covariates were

117 category at baseline using Cox proportional-hazards models, and at any time during the exposure peri

118 eier method, log-rank test, Cox proportional hazards models, and propensity score-matched analyses.

119 Cox proportional hazards models assessed consistency of treatment effect

120 Proportional hazards models assessed differences in outcome reduction

121 Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between TBI and

122 fied multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, black women and men were more likely to

123 In adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, compared with patients receiving neither

124 e Fine-and-Gray proportional subdistribution hazards model concerning ICU mortality and ICU discharge

125 cancer were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, considering exposure as a time-varying v

126 ble logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models controlled for confounding by patient dem

127 Cox proportional hazards models (controlling for patient gender, age at i

128 Cox proportional hazards models coupled with the least absolute shrinkage

129 A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that multifocality, extrahepa

130 Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models determined association of poor MH and pla

131 In an unadjusted Cox proportional hazards model, each CAD $10000 increase in neighborhood

132 xamined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models employing an interaction term between LNR

133 Cox proportional hazards models estimated site-specific hazard ratios (HR

134 Cox proportional hazards models estimated the association between baselin

135 Cox proportional hazards models estimated the association between baselin

136 Mediation analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model estimates that patients who have serious s

137 Cox proportional hazards modeling evaluated factors associated with the m

138 Cox proportional hazards models evaluated predictors of loss of >=15 lett

139 Proportional hazards models examined associations between scam awaren

140 n rehospitalization using a Cox proportional hazards model, following sequential adjustment for covar

141 bles, a multivariable mixed Cox proportional hazards model for graft failure revealed that donor aged

142 Using a Cox proportional hazards model for mortality from all causes, with data f

143 ations, and biomarkers into Cox proportional hazards models for each outcome.

144 ing logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards models for hospital and 1-year mortality, respec

145 We ran Cox proportional hazards models for PM2.5 adjusted for eight subject-leve

146 Cox proportional hazards models for recurrent gap-time data were used to

147 ared with vancomycin, using Cox proportional hazards models for time to 30-day all-cause mortality, C

148 Cox proportional hazards modeling found that bariatric surgery was indepe

149 Using Cox proportional hazards models, hazard ratios (HRs) associated with post

150 constructed a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model in which the impact of each covariate was

151 the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models in order to estimate the association betw

152 were performed with the use of proportional-hazards models in the per-protocol population (all parti

153 the primary analyses using Cox proportional hazards models in those with no previous CVD and repeate

154 y using confounder-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models (including gait speed and daily walking t

155 or covariates, results from Cox proportional hazards models, including SBP and DBP, jointly suggested

156 ding through time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models may provide biased estimates of the causa

157 ETU care, a marginal structural proportional hazards model (MSPHM) with inverse probability weighting

158 Identification was through Cox proportional hazards modeling of ROX association with HFNC outcome.

159 Proportional hazards models of time to first injurious violence were

160 Cox proportional-hazards model (PHM) and propensity score matching were u

161 d using a log-rank test and Cox proportional-hazards model, respectively.

162 nt outcome prediction using Cox proportional-hazards model showed that protein-activity (but not muta

163 0.10-mg/m3 exposure level, Cox proportional hazards models showed significantly increased risk of mo

164 ropensity score adjustment, Cox proportional hazards models showed similar mortality rates between or

165 to-event outcomes using the Cox proportional hazards model so that a treatment effect is estimated as

166 nly through a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model stratified by trial.

167 ere evaluated with weighted Cox proportional hazards models stratified by race/ethnicity.

168 Using Cox proportional hazards models, survival analysis was performed, and dem

169 r survival in multivariable Cox proportional hazards models that included weight and body mass index

170 were tested with the use of Cox proportional hazards models that were adjusted for age, sex, body mas

171 ent AMD were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models that were adjusted for age, sex, total en

172 In an adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, thrombocytopenia was significantly associ

173 exposure was modelled using Cox proportional hazards models (time to first charge) and Andersen-Gill

174 In this analysis we used a proportional hazards model to assess effects of radiotherapy on risks

175 Meier survival curves and a Cox proportional hazards model to derive an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR).

176 zed by using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model to determine risk factors for persistence.

177 We used the Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate time-related risk of CD based

178 We first fitted a Cox proportional hazards model to examine the relation of knee SxOA to th

179 We used a Cox proportional hazards model to identify factors affecting survival and

180 We used a Cox proportional hazards model to identify index case, contact, and house

181 ractions across groups, and Cox proportional hazards modeling to determine associations between HDL-P

182 We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 9

183 We then used Cox proportional hazards modeling to evaluate adherence to this pattern a

184 We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to examine the association between nitr

185 ed using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models to adjust for known adverse prognostic fa

186 We fitted Cox proportional hazards models to adjust for other factors to estimate t

187 used linear regression and Cox proportional hazards models to assess the associations of co-prescrip

188 We used Cox proportional hazards models to assess the independent associations of

189 duration, and used adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to compare diabetes medication discontinu

190 They applied Cox proportional hazards models to determine the association between an F

191 We applied Cox proportional hazards models to determine the effect of covariates.

192 We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to estimate associations of incident post

193 We used proportional hazards models to estimate associations.

194 We fit Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% c

195 We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs), adjustin

196 We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios and 95% CIs of

197 We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate multivariate hazard ratios (H

198 ed-mortality-ratio-weighted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association between influ

199 We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of ESKD

200 We used multivariable-adjusted Cox hazards models to evaluate the association of GlycA with

201 We used multivariable proportional hazards models to evaluate the association of HHV-6B(+)

202 We built multivariate Cox proportional hazards models to evaluate the effect of alcohol consump

203 er curves and used adjusted Cox proportional-hazards models to examine the differences between the ea

204 ier survival and univariate Cox proportional hazards models to examine the effect of LSF on survival

205 We used Cox proportional hazards models to examine the relationship between green

206 stimate 5-year survival and Cox proportional hazards models to generate hazard ratios.

207 tic regression and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to identify risk factors for limited heal

208 nnual eGFR assessments, and Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the association between sl

209 We used Cox proportional hazards models to investigate whether associations of br

210 scriminative ability of the Cox-proportional hazards models to predict mortality was highest when the

211 We applied Cox proportional hazards models to test the potential HTEs on the remaini

212 In time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models, use of TRT was not associated with an ov

213 atment arm and region, with Cox proportional hazards modeling used to evaluate predictors of disconti

214 e trained and cross-validated a proportional hazards model using bone marrow infiltration, immunoglob

215 a propensity score-weighted Cox proportional hazards model using data from the British Association of

216 Survival was analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models using clinical or pathological staging, a

217 and pathway-level penalized Cox proportional hazards models using SPM and CNV data for 29 different T

218 nverse probability weighted Cox proportional hazards model, using a propensity score based on age, st

219 or disengagement based on a Cox proportional hazards model, using multiple imputation for missing dat

220 A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was created to control for confounders ide

221 A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was then used to analyze the association o

222 The marginal Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the factors associated

223 A proportional hazards model was used to calculate risk-adjusted mortal

224 A multivariate proportional hazards model was used to determine the association of i

225 A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) f

226 A marginal multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model was used to estimate the association betwe

227 A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association of AA

228 Cox proportional hazards model was used to examine the association betwee

229 ethods, and a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify independent predictor

230 Mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to adjust for patient ability

231 Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to compare outcomes including

232 Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to estimate the association of

233 Cox proportional hazards modeling was used with the Fine and Gray method

234 end point, assessed with a Cox proportional-hazards model, was the time to the first pericarditis re

235 l variables and a penalised Cox proportional-hazards model, was used to compare method performance.

236 Using a Cox proportional hazards model, we compared all-cause mortality across di

237 Using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, we compared cumulative incidence of all-

238 Using Cox proportional hazards models, we estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) and

239 In Cox proportional hazards models, we estimated unadjusted and adjusted haz

240 Using standard adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, we found a reduction in all-cause mortal

241 Whereas earlier studies assumed proportional hazards models, we used nonparametric regression methods

242 Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to evaluate differences in pr

243 Cox proportional hazards models were built and locked in the training coh

244 Cox proportional hazards models were constructed for survival free from a

245 Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to determine association

246 Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to examine the relations

247 et (n = 159), the following Cox proportional-hazards models were constructed, each adjusted for age a

248 For each sex, Cox proportional hazards models were developed to predict major bleeding

249 Cox proportional hazards models were fit to assess the independent progno

250 Cox proportional hazards models were fit to evaluate the association of s

251 Cox proportional hazards models were fit to identify whether size measure

252 Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to assess associations of ast

253 Cox proportional hazards models were performed.

254 Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox proportional hazards models were used for subgroup and multivariate a

255 Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models were used for time-to-event analysis; rec

256 Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze variables associated

257 Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess all-cause and cardiov

258 Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess donor and recipient f

259 Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess effects on noncancer

260 er curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess survival.

261 Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs

262 Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate the hazard ratios

263 Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare survival between pat

264 Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the risk of developi

265 Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the risk of developi

266 Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the risk of incident

267 Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare time-to-event outcom

268 Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute the associations wit

269 Multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations betwe

270 Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate [Formula: see text]

271 Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratio (HR) a

272 Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional-hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs)

273 Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 9

274 Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate HRs and 95% CIs of

275 Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of adjus

276 Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (H

277 ivariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate clinical and labora

278 Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the adjusted hazard

279 Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association bet

280 Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association bet

281 Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate whether subtypes we

282 Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine a 1-year composite o

283 Mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine associations between

284 Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine incident breast canc

285 Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models were used to examine incident cancer up t

286 Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the association of s

287 Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify predictors of progn

288 Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate baseline variabl

289 Mixed and proportional hazards models were used to test individual-level associ

290 Cox proportional-hazards models were utilized to estimate the adjusted as

291 ble logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized.

292 ersen-Gill extension to the Cox proportional hazards model while accounting for the competing risk of

293 e survival analysis we used Cox proportional hazards model with inverse weighting by propensity score

294 maternal outcomes we applied a proportional hazards model with time-updated IPT exposure.

295 estimated using a mixed-effects proportional hazards model with transplant as a time-dependent covari

296 rtality was determined in 3 Cox-proportional hazards models with (1) no CNS, (2) observed CNS, and (3

297 Multivariable discrete time Cox proportional hazards models with four periods [ovarian stimulation (O

298 We usedCox proportional hazards models with inverse probability of treatment and

299 Multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards models with post-procedure MALE hospitalization

300 os (HRs) for death by using Cox proportional hazards models, with adjustment for age, sex, race/ethni