ライフサイエンスコーパス: posttest

1 left main CAD from 77% (pretest) to 95-100% (posttest).

2 asis from 15% to 44% (pretest) to 3% to 18% (posttest).

3 a different intraoperative crisis scenario (posttest).

4 c patients (P < 0.0001; analysis of variance posttest).

5 ng during the 8-10 d between the pretest and posttest.

6 Fellows' knowledge was assessed by pre- and posttest.

7 All visitors were offered a posttest.

8 a pretest and again, 2 weeks later, during a posttest.

9 - and between-group differences from pre- to posttest.

10 orts; 150 participants (70.8%) completed the posttest.

11 ling on participant distress 3 and 12 months posttest.

12 mean JND significantly decreased (- 32%) at posttest.

13 g the 3 cohorts, as measured using a head CT posttest.

14 ap or in striatal activation from pretest to posttest.

15 task, and crowding ratios were reduced after posttest.

16 nswer, was chosen by >20% of students on the posttest.

17 rained residents also took a written pre and posttest.

18 sical function were assessed at baseline and posttest.

19 Six fellows completed both pre- and posttests.

20 riteria, and completed immediate and delayed posttests.

21 dards and deviants at both early and delayed posttests.

22 h no consistent differences between pre- and posttesting.

23 etecting) oddball tasks in a pretest and two posttests (1 and 9 weeks after training).

24 we examined pretest (before instruction) and posttest (after instruction) responses from 751 students

25 ance was compared to residents' baseline and posttest (after simulation training) performance.

26 tional and cultural changes included pretest-posttest AHF team member surveys, transcripts of AHF mee

27 eta-analyses of 0.38 (95% CI, 0.26-0.51) and posttest analysis of 0.19 (95% CI, 0.12-0.26) also indic

28 agement, and symptom perception subscales at posttest and 3-month end points.

29 aining and the transfer task from pretest to posttest and an increase in striatal activation in both

30 13.76; 95% CI, 5.89-21.62; Cohen d = 0.46 at posttest and Cohen d = 0.35 at 3 months) and symptom per

31 0.36; 95% CI, 13.98-26.75; Cohen d = 0.84 at posttest and Cohen d = 0.61 at 3 months).

32 ness significantly decreased from pretest to posttest and follow-up after recall+EMs relative to the

33 service use, and general psychopathology at posttest and follow-up.

34 SBML participants took a posttest and were required to meet or exceed a minimum p

35 ROP tutorial, ROP educational chapters, and posttest), and 29 of 58 trainees (50%) were randomized t

36 left main CAD from 23% (pretest) to 65-100% (posttest), and NI values <10 increased the probability o

37 created using clinical cases (20 pretest, 20 posttest, and 25 training chapter-based) developed from

38 Written pretest, 6-week posttest, and 6-month followup tests measured pain ratin

39 ased clinical cases of ROP during a pretest, posttest, and training chapters.

40 Posttest assessment of diagnostic performance of MDCT fo

41 contraception use for family planning, and a posttest assessment was conducted on the same group of s

42 n the overall mean score between pretest and posttest assessments after the intervention.

43 ress) were lower overall between pretest and posttest assessments.

44 Gains were not significant at posttest, but MAE was significantly reduced (- 27%) at r

45 es increased from the 10-item pretest to the posttest by 3.1 items for measles, 3.8 for influenza, 1.

46 Although pretest and posttest communications were not standardized, overall s

47 AST tended to have larger increases in PA at posttest compared with participants who received health

48 cored 100% on first and second trials of the posttest, compared to those receiving the routine proced

49 We conducted a longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study to estimate the change i

50 expressing the human A1 receptor (ANOVA and posttest comparison, P<0.01).

51 st (CCPA, 10 nM)-treated myocytes (ANOVA and posttest comparison, P<0.01).

52 Single posttest comparisons of independent samples were perform

53 Subjects completed pre- and posttest confidence questionnaires and feedback forms.

54 ents, we tested listeners on a pretest and a posttest consisting of auditory relative-timing conditio

55 A randomized pretest/posttest control group design with a standardized videot

56 -assigned stepped-wedge study with a pretest-posttest control group in 15 villages: six immediate (Ar

57 nducted in 2012 and had a randomized pretest-posttest controlled design with a 10-week follow-up.

58 icts, we enrolled 98 in a randomized pretest-posttest controlled experiment starting August 15, 2010,

59 gynecologist for pretest education (11%) or posttest counseling (22%).

60 nts identified with HBV (HBsAg-positive) for posttest counseling and hepatitis B-directed care.

61 a physician is accompanied by both pre- and posttest counseling by a trained genetic counselor.

62 pretest counseling for all participants and posttest counseling for those without PV during remote g

63 For posttest counseling, 38% of women preferred an oncologis

64 ng, or 1 of 3 study arms without pretest and posttest counseling.

65 , (2) use of medical jargon, and (3) unclear posttest course.

66 A pretest/posttest cross-sectional study design with Healthy older

67 ttended 6 or more of 8 sessions and provided posttest data.

68 We used a one-group pretest-posttest design and national survey data from 1996 (base

69 veloping 6-y-olds in a 3-mo pretest-training-posttest design that was ecologically deployed (at schoo

70 The study was a pretest-posttest design with qualitative data collected at 3 poi

71 Using a pretest-posttest design, the strategy included an 8-week multico

72 perimental study with a single group pretest/posttest design.

73 conducted in 2012 used a randomized pretest-posttest design.

74 groups, and 405 used a single-group pretest-posttest design.

75 t values for E=8.7 [3.0] and 5.4 [2.8]; mean posttest difference between conditions=3.4; P<.001; 95%

76 etic testing was not inferior with regard to posttest distress, providing an alternative care model f

77 sks among those with versus without elevated posttest estimated risk.

78 pated in a cross-sectionally sampled pretest-posttest evaluation of brochures, posters, and messages

79 e measure was mean participant scores at the posttest evaluation, which was conducted 4 months after

80 ecreased significantly (P<0.05) from pre- to posttest for 7 of 12 foods (trained group) by both calcu

81 ele-education system performed better on the posttest for accurately diagnosing plus disease (67% vs.

82 mologists-in-training during the pretest and posttest for both groups.

83 Posttest fracture probabilities were calculated from bas

84 with a 25- or 28-gene panel, and pretest and posttest genetic counseling by a genetic counselor or an

85 the effects of individualized pretest and/or posttest genetic counseling on participant distress 3 an

86 uding judicious genetic testing, pretest and posttest genetic counseling, interpretation and applicat

87 4 arms: the control arm with pretest and/or posttest genetic counseling, or 1 of 3 study arms withou

88 content and process of pretest education and posttest genetic counseling.

89 The posttest geriatric consultation (GC) group (n = 85) was

90 m]; 95% CI, 82-86 to 74 bpm; 95% CI, 72-76), posttest HR (mean, 128 bpm; 95% CI, 125-131 to 113 bpm;

91 ght in meters squared), and surgical center (posttest HR and HR difference were further adjusted for

92 Posttest HR further improved from 6 months to 12 months

93 test HR, and HR difference (resting HR minus posttest HR) were measured and musculoskeletal pain conc

94 mpletion, resting heart rate (HR), immediate posttest HR, and HR difference (resting HR minus posttes

95 etest; website participants also completed a posttest immediately after viewing Informate.

96 sts for relative effect (RE, RE >0.5 signals posttest improvement).

97 , 29.5; t = -3.08; P = 0.002), based on pre-/posttesting in a large (approximately 120 students) unde

98 All subjects completed pre- and posttesting, in which they described works of art, retin

99 itude of the P3 component to deviants across posttests, indicating a long-lasting effect of discrimin

100 ics using a standardized scoring system, and posttest interviews guided by a framework for implementi

101 Genetic counseling both pretesting and posttesting is essential to accurate, cost-efficient car

102 Pretest and posttest knowledge mean scores were 58% and 69%, respect

103 dents showed improvement between pretest and posttest knowledge scores (p < .05).

104 urably in comparison to simulation groups in posttest knowledge scores, cognitive gain, skill perform

105 ed to similar and significant changes in the posttest likelihood of cancer for both dense and fatty b

106 to 0.99), which, when present, increases the posttest likelihood of EAS to 74%, assuming a pretest pr

107 We evaluated the likelihood of (1) a posttest management change and (2) an indication for add

108 Fasting and posttest meal glucose, lipid, and insulin concentrations

109 ion in burnout (pretest mean, 2.69 +/- 0.94; posttest mean, 2.18 +/- 0.74; t = 3.50, P < .001) and in

110 ntent to leave (pretest mean, 3.12 +/- 2.23; posttest mean, 2.56 +/- 1.84; t = 1.78, P < .05).

111 and engagement (pretest mean, 5.27 +/- 1.20, posttest mean, 5.68 +/- 0.96; t = 2.50, P < .01), with a

112 kplace climate (pretest mean, 5.09 +/- 1.43; posttest mean, 5.77 +/- 1.11; t = 3.35, P < .001), and e

113 unication (pretest mean, 4.59 +/- 1.51 [SD]; posttest mean, 5.80 +/- 1.01; t = 5.97, P < .001), workp

114 met or exceeded the minimum passing score at posttest: mean (internal jugular) = 93.9%, SD = 10.2; me

115 A posttest measured comprehension of consent-relevant info

116 Posttest measures of psychosomatic understanding, judgme

117 posttest only (n = 10), single-group pretest/posttest (n = 2), nonrandomized 2-group (n = 13), and ra

118 patient interventional (n = 13), pretest and posttest (n = 9), randomized clinical trials (n = 9), an

119 states were used for comparison in a pretest-posttest nonequivalent group design.

120 gns included single-group cross-sectional or posttest only (n = 10), single-group pretest/posttest (n

121 e randomized to a control group (pretest and posttest only).

122 TT versus exercise MPI yields similar 2-year posttest outcomes while providing significant diagnostic

123 around time necessary to achieve the desired posttesting outcomes.

124 knowledge score increase between pretest and posttest (P < 0.001).

125 mance significantly improved from pretest to posttest (P = 0.008) regardless of the type of debriefin

126 rbal comprehension skills (0.28 SD higher at posttest, P < 0.001), but did not affect their print-lit

127 sed from 85.1% to 87.0% overall (pretest vs. posttest; P<0.001) and from 80.6% to 82.0% for teenagers

128 At posttest, participants who received Ex + AST had signifi

129 Resident posttest performance after simulation training was signi

130 sts used and it is recommended they estimate posttest probabilities according to likelihood ratios as

131 Plotting of posttest probabilities against prevalence for both disea

132 ange an individual's pretest disease odds to posttest probabilities and can confirm vCJD infection.

133 eria for IgM immunoblot interpretation yield posttest probabilities of 4%-32%.

134 ify the maximum pretest probability at which posttest probabilities of a negative CEM or CE-MRI exami

135 Posttest probabilities of deep myometrial invasion for g

136 Use of functional MR increased the final posttest probabilities of hemispheric language dominance

137 e of functional MR increases importantly the posttest probabilities of hemispheric language dominance

138 rst-case-scenario (pretest probability, 50%) posttest probabilities were 94% and 13% for positive and

139 Positive and negative posttest probabilities were calculated and plotted again

140 nter's approximate mortality rate to produce posttest probabilities.

141 g specific populations, strongly influencing posttest probabilities.

142 inance or ambidexterity, there was very high posttest probability (>or=95%) of a correlation between

143 dless of hand dominance, there was very high posttest probability (>or=96%) of a correlation between

144 opulation with ambidexterity, there was high posttest probability (80%-87%) of correlations between f

145 t-handed epilepsy population, there was high posttest probability (80%-97%) of a correlation between

146 handed nonepileptic subjects, there was high posttest probability (81%-83%) of a correlation between

147 s in peripheral blood failed to increase the posttest probability above 90% in this setting of Campyl

148 etest probability target values to achieve a posttest probability less than 2% was used on the basis

149 t probability of 17.8% (low BI-RADS 4B) to a posttest probability of 2% (BI-RADS 3).

150 h 10% pretest probability of TB would have a posttest probability of 4% with a score of 3/10 versus 4

151 od ratio (LR) of 28.7, which translated to a posttest probability of 43.1%.

152 seases, and the correct diagnosis had a mean posttest probability of 67.3%.

153 sensitivity and 61% specificity, yielding a posttest probability of 72%.

154 cy" group of 36 patients with a low pre- and posttest probability of CAD.

155 framework to provide an estimate of (1) the posttest probability of candidate diagnoses, (2) the LR

156 nhanced MR imaging significantly affects the posttest probability of deep myometrial invasion in pati

157 mogram was provided to assist calculation of posttest probability of disease from the calculated like

158 rinalysis are not able to reliably lower the posttest probability of disease to a level where a UTI c

159 ratios, which were analyzed to determine the posttest probability of language dominance by using func

160 ng out Campylobacter infection, defined as a posttest probability of less than 10%, was similarly obs

161 y showed only moderate increases in positive posttest probability of lymph node metastasis for all me

162 of less than 500 ng/mL is associated with a posttest probability of PE less than 1.85%.

163 With a negative V/Q SPECT result, the posttest probability of PE was 0.010, 0.037, and 0.119 f

164 With a positive V/Q SPECT result, the posttest probability of PE was 0.531, 0.814, and 0.939 f

165 cts with an LPS<=Q(1) (lower-quartile) had a posttest probability of responding of 14% (3/21), while

166 ts with an LPS>= Q(3) (upper-quartile) had a posttest probability of responding of 90% (19/21).

167 Subjects with Q(1)<LPS<Q(3) had a posttest probability of responding that was essentially

168 The posttest probability of tuberculosis following a negativ

169 thresholds that can be derived from pretest-posttest probability plots.

170 .2% (pretest probability) to 91.1% or 91.4% (posttest probability), while in patients with a negative

171 e evaluated to determine their impact on the posttest probability, defined as the likelihood of a dia

172 A controlled, pretest-posttest, prospective cohort study assessed the impact o

173 We conducted a single pretest, single posttest quasi-experiment in a multicenter health system

174 A pre- and posttest questionnaire was sent to treating physicians t

175 tes (0.3%/y and 4.9%/y for low and high risk posttest, respectively).

176 pecificity calculations from the pretest and posttest results of the educational intervention group v

177 Pretest and posttest results were obtained on a total of 1122 learne

178 tions: pretesting (guessing before reading), posttesting (retrieving after reading), or no-testing.

179 Posttest risk stratification is based on the Duke treadm

180 .5 minutes), and sleep duration baseline and posttest scores for C=5.8 [1.1] and 6.0 [1.0]; for E=6.0

181 single imputation were used to estimate the posttest scores of patients who left treatment before co

182 of 1.06 (95% CI, 0.81-1.31) indicating that posttest scores were approximately 1 SD above pretest sc

183 training regimen, which was followed by two posttest sessions, separated by another week without tra

184 nd masked to group assignment and pretesting/posttesting status.

185 Data are presented from a 1-group pretest-posttest study examining the role of extensive counselin

186 In this pretest-posttest study, patients with AMS from PLCs at 2 academi

187 In this pretest-posttest study, the pretest control group (n = 37) was r

188 26 to 0.84, all P < 0.001), as assessed in a posttest survey.

189 scored 0.29 SD higher on numerical skills at posttest than children in 25 randomly assigned control c

190 mbined (symptoms, self-harm, and suicide) at posttest, the investigated psychotherapies were moderate

191 In the posttest, the most learned methods were intrauterine dev

192 nd of potentially failing to determine which posttest therapeutic approach optimizes treatment benefi

193 roved its use as a means to identify optimal posttest treatment.

194 ble to complications of invasive testing and posttest treatment.

195 ns has the potential to optimize downstream (posttesting) use of limited health care resources, inclu

196 p quality, sleep-onset latency (baseline and posttest values for C=26.1 [20.0] and 23.8 [15.3]; for E

197 for C=8.93 [3.1] and 8.8 [2.6]; baseline and posttest values for E=8.7 [3.0] and 5.4 [2.8]; mean post

198 global sleep score at 16 weeks (baseline and posttest values in mean [SD] for C=8.93 [3.1] and 8.8 [2

199 + WT showed greater improvements on pretest-posttest variables of executive function, working memory

200 gnostic thinking (impact of a test result on posttest vs. pretest probability of a correct diagnosis)

201 nswered correctly on the pretest was 62% and posttest was 77% (P = 0.02).

202 Differential treatment retention at posttest was analyzed, reporting odds ratios.

203 Average knowledge scores for pretest and posttest were 3.32 and 5.88, respectively (maximum 10).

204 nd capillary blood collections, and pre- and posttests were offered during HCW training.

205 ntal study was designed, using a pretest and posttest with a nonrandomized control group.

206 res between the initial pretest and the last posttest with performance increments following both expo

207 intervention group had better results at the posttest, with a mean (SD) score (out of a possible 160.