ライフサイエンスコーパス: ordinal scale

1 ciation with patient response as measured by Ordinal Scale.

2 ating SOS-type liver injury, using a 4-point ordinal scale.

3 keys represent the numerosities 1 to 9 on an ordinal scale.

4 ultrasounds were categorized using a 6-point ordinal scale.

5 day the participant scored at least 6 on the ordinal scale.

6 al status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale.

7 s of other biomarkers or the day 5 pulmonary ordinal scale.

8 ticularly behavioral disorders, are rated on ordinal scales.

9 ntal and behavioral conditions, are rated on ordinal scales.

10 nclude subjectivity and coarse resolution of ordinal scales.

11 dex measures severity of 5 event types using ordinal scales.

12 symptoms, how did they affect your activity (ordinal scale 0-3)?" For CFS, moderate to severe reducti

13 al intensity was quantified on a three-point ordinal scale (0 = hypointense to brain parenchyma, 1 =

14 ared between CSS and AG in 45 patients on an ordinal scale (0, worst; 10, best) with primary analyses

15 The severity was graded on a four-point ordinal scale: 0 (none), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), and 3 (

16 sed were clinical status on a seven-category ordinal scale (1, discharge; 7, death), mortality, time

17 progression on the World Health Organization ordinal scale (33% vs 4%; P < .001).

18 the World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point ordinal scale analyzed using a proportional odds model a

19 s following randomization, measured using an ordinal scale and analyzed using a proportional odds mod

20 IPN questions to track symptoms on a 0 to 10 ordinal scale and contained a questionnaire about falls.

21 We evaluated 14 traits on an ordinal scale and found significant association (P value

22 These samples were graded on an ordinal scale and genotyped for variants associated with

23 modified World Health Organization six-point ordinal scale and laboratory parameters.

24 om color fundus stereophotographs both on an ordinal scale and using continuous estimates of areas wi

25 isual lesion-to-background contrast (4-point ordinal scale) and diagnostic confidence (3-point ordina

26 l arterial filling was scored on a six-point ordinal scale, and interrater reliability was tested.

27 A 7-point pulmonary ordinal scale assessed at day 5 was compared using propo

28 of having a higher score on the seven-point ordinal scale at 15 days was not affected by either hydr

29 tilation duration at 28 days, or the 6-point ordinal scale at 15 days.

30 The median value for clinical status on the ordinal scale at day 28 was 1.0 (95% confidence interval

31 ical status on the World Health Organization ordinal scale at days 14 and 28 for cohorts 1 and 3, and

32 nd was a reduction in disease severity on an ordinal scale by day 2.

33 as time to a score of 1 or 2 on a 7-category ordinal scale by day 28.

34 rapy with respect to a graded, multivariate, ordinal scale chosen to reflect the full range of the di

35 ardiovascular organ support-free days, on an ordinal scale combining in-hospital death (assigned a va

36 was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale consisting of the number of days alive fre

37 r the appropriate analysis of non-normal and ordinal-scaled data have appeared in the dental research

38 ed as having severe disease according to the ordinal scale developed by the World Health Organization

39 s on the World Health Organisation Blueprint Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement by day 28 of enro

40 the 11-point World Health Organization (WHO) Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement on day 14 after r

41 s performed on the basis of a seven-category ordinal scale for pulmonary function on day 5.

42 al scale) and diagnostic confidence (3-point ordinal scale) for all tumors.

43 Temperature perception was assessed using an ordinal scale from - 5 (coolest) to + 5 (warmest).

44 verage scores for 45 NSSs, each scored on an ordinal scale from 0 to 3, masked to diagnosis and comba

45 d patient-reported overall AD impact scores (ordinal scale from 1 [no impact] to 5 [significant impac

46 ecovery by day 28 evaluated using an 8-point ordinal scale (higher scores indicate better health).

47 and left neck were performed using a 5-point ordinal scale (Hopkins criteria).

48 e worst severity of illness on an 8-category ordinal scale, hospital-free days within 30 days after r

49 Analyses were evaluated on an ordinal scale in the intention-to-treat population.

50 the likelihood of SVI by using a five-point ordinal scale in three image-viewing settings: T2-weight

51 An a priori 5-level ordinal scale including hospitalization intensive care u

52 s COVID-19 severity measured on a five-level ordinal scale, including none of the following complicat

53 n conditions and diseases are measured in an ordinal scale, methods need to be developed to investiga

54 l disease severity among groups employing an ordinal scale (mild, moderate, severe) using multivariab

55 spectral mammographic and MR images with the ordinal scale: minimal, mild, moderate, or marked.

56 ideos, and determine MR severity on a 4-step ordinal scale (none/trace, mild, moderate, and severe) u

57 bution of clinical outcomes according to the ordinal scale (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval

58 seline World Health Organization seven-point ordinal scale of >=5 were randomized to receive a single

59 luating for new blood-vessel formation on an ordinal scale of 0 to 3.

60 e Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS; an ordinal scale of 0-10, with higher scores indicating inc

61 gren and Lawrence (K/L) scoring system on an ordinal scale of 0-4.

62 in first 2 days or World Health Organization ordinal scale of 4 or higher on admission, with a random

63 nt of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6

64 The primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; ho

65 Clinical trial outcomes often involve an ordinal scale of subjective functional assessments but t

66 Exercise tests were scored on an ordinal scale of worst ventricular arrhythmia observed (

67 ned from the measured hindlimb movement, (2) ordinal scales of paw placement, weight-bearing, and lim

68 was clinical status assessed by a six-point ordinal scale on day 7 (death, in intensive care, hospit

69 ropositive participants with COVID-19 (NIAID ordinal scale [OS] 5, 6, or 7 at entry) were assessed lo

70 ughly 0.4 points higher than men on a 0 to 4 ordinal scale (P <.00001).

71 PNS staging was assessed using an automatic ordinal scaling (PNS-O, grades 0-5) and a manually defin

72 p was evident for each level increase on the ordinal scale prenatally (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% CI,

73 A four-point ordinal-scale qualitative flow index was used for assess

74 ery until day 28 as assessed by a 7-category ordinal scale (range, 1-7, with higher scores indicating

75 ing as an objective measure of itch (4-point ordinal scale ranging from 0 [not present] to 3 [very pr

76 Bleeding was graded on an ordinal scale ranging from 0 to 5.

77 randomization as assessed with a 7-category ordinal scale ranging from 1 (death) to 7 (discharged fr

78 outcome was clinical status at day 28 on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 (discharged or ready for di

79 ry or death by day 14, measured on a 5-level ordinal scale ranging from no acute kidney injury to dea

80 the intervention, as measured on a six-point ordinal scale ranging from total recovery to death.

81 status of patients at day 15 using a 6-point ordinal scale (ranging from 1, not hospitalized to 6, de

82 hological phenotypes are often labelled with ordinal scales rather than binary, e.g. the Gleason grad

83 They used ordinal-scaled self-rated global health as a measure of

84 The severity of chills graded on an ordinal scale (shaking chills, LR, 4.7; 95% CI, 3.0-7.2)

85 was organ support-free days evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned

86 was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned

87 was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death and, for p

88 eighted modified Rankin Scale (a seven-level ordinal scale that ranges from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [dea

89 ving some evidence of sensitivity to change: ordinal scales, the Short Form 36 vitality subscale, the

90 itional ranking ranging from simple stepwise ordinal scales to iconic ordinality that creates a parab

91 mmonly used on data belonging to nominal and ordinal scale types.

92 outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to

93 Nuclear opacity was assessed on a five-point ordinal scale using lens photographs taken at baseline (

94 With five-point ordinal scales, VCUG images were scored independently fo

95 Day 14 WHO 11-point ordinal scale was used as the primary outcome to develop

96 atus measured at 15 days using a seven level ordinal scale, was analysed as a composite of death or m

97 COVID-19 with scores 3-5 on the 9-point WHO ordinal scale were randomized to receive either (1) E2 c

98 A multiple-choice format and ordinal scale were used to query applicants on demograph

99 status and status changes, as measured by an ordinal scale, were added.

100 s of having a worse score on the eight-level ordinal scale with tofacitinib, as compared with placebo

101 ys as assessed with the use of a seven-level ordinal scale (with levels ranging from one to seven and

102 8 as assessed with the use of an eight-level ordinal scale (with scores ranging from 1 to 8 and highe

103 after randomisation, assessed by a six-point ordinal scale, with levels ranging from 1 to 6 and highe