ライフサイエンスコーパス: pretest

1 l teams managed a simulated crisis scenario (pretest).

2 s, particularly with respect to training and pretesting.

3 level of significance that incorporates the pretesting.

4 revised based on expert input and cognitive pretesting.

5 Participants received two pretests (1 week apart) prior to a week-long environment

6 At clinical skills examination pretest, 12 (16%) of 76 simulator-trained residents met

7 system was created using clinical cases (20 pretest, 20 posttest, and 25 training chapter-based) dev

8 Written pretest, 6-week posttest, and 6-month followup tests mea

9 rallel experiments, we tested listeners on a pretest and a posttest consisting of auditory relative-t

10 Simple pretest and exercise scores risk-stratified patients wit

11 Previously validated pretest and exercise test scores as well as the Duke tre

12 A simple nomogram based on easily obtained pretest and exercise test variables predicted all-cause

13 Higher levels of pretest and mean cortisol as well as the area under the

14 med randomized controlled trial with 1-month pretest and post-test assessments was conducted with wom

15 Oncologists' recommendations pretest and post-test remained the same in 464 patients

16 8), single-patient interventional (n = 13), pretest and posttest (n = 9), randomized clinical trials

17 7% same day knowledge score increase between pretest and posttest (P < 0.001).

18 Although pretest and posttest communications were not standardize

19 the ophthalmologists-in-training during the pretest and posttest for both groups.

20 ponents including judicious genetic testing, pretest and posttest genetic counseling, interpretation

21 Pretest and posttest knowledge mean scores were 58% and

22 es (50%) were randomized to a control group (pretest and posttest only).

23 tivity and specificity calculations from the pretest and posttest results of the educational interven

24 Average knowledge scores for pretest and posttest were 3.32 and 5.88, respectively (m

25 ihour training during the 8-10 d between the pretest and posttest.

26 vironmental sound scores between the initial pretest and the last posttest with performance increment

27 g) and active (detecting) oddball tasks in a pretest and two posttests (1 and 9 weeks after training)

28 g a 3x magnifying loop and torch light and a pretested and structured questionnaire was completed.

29 Genetic counseling both pretesting and posttesting is essential to accurate, cos

30 ricians and pediatric oncologists developed, pretested, and modified the survey for item clarificatio

31 We also investigated the effect of pretest antimicrobials and interpretation of molecules o

32 , or no-treatment control conditions after a pretest assessment in which a target vegetable was selec

33 orating the expected HbA1C distribution into pretest atherosclerotic CVD risk has a modest effect on

34 Each participant was required to take a pretest before taking the study module and an identical

35 slated into Sinhala, the native language and pretested before distribution.

36 In total, we examined pretest (before instruction) and posttest (after instruc

37 16%, and 5% of hospitals lack incinerators, pretested blood, intensive care units, and computed tomo

38 The findings support the use of BRCAPRO in pretest BRCA mutation prediction among minority families

39 Pretest CA2+3 (t31 = -3.93, P < .001) volume was negativ

40 Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for pretest CAD likelihood and risk factors.

41 on of the shift in risk varied markedly with pretest CHD risk and with the pattern of risk factors.

42 o CAC score is expected, even with identical pretest CHD risk, the same CAC score of 50 may be alarmi

43 tion explained) and can be used to update a "pretest" CHD risk estimate, such as the 10-year Framingh

44 o describe a risk tool developed to use only pretest clinical data to identify patients with chest pa

45 r cutoff of 500 microg/L, the combination of pretest clinical probability assessment with age-adjuste

46 a newly developed diagnostic scorecard, the pretest clinical probability of catecholaminergic polymo

47 9%) on the basis of the combination of a low pretest clinical probability of pulmonary embolism and n

48 lism was ruled out in patients who had a low pretest clinical probability, which was defined accordin

49 lue of all tests increased greatly with high pretest clinical probability.

50 specifically in patients at moderate to high pretest clinical risk and in patients with previous coro

51 t it became comparable once adjusted for the pretest clinical risk and stress MPI results.

52 least 1 positive troponin (n=97) had higher pretest clinical scores, more renal dysfunction, and low

53 hough women in comparison with men had lower pretest clinical scores, rates of prior myocardial infar

54 The 4Ts is a pretest clinical scoring system for heparin-induced thro

55 e of clinical CPVT in individuals with a low pretest clinical suspicion for CPVT.

56 A simple combination of pretest clinical variables improves prediction of high-r

57 In a second experiment, pretest consumption of sucrose solution resulted in a sh

58 In this pretest-posttest study, the pretest control group (n = 37) was retrospectively ident

59 s' knowledge scores remained 22.6% above the pretest; control scores increased to 11.8% (P = 0.0001).

60 more flexible approach with less emphasis on pretest counseling and that HIV self-testing has been ad

61 At 2 weeks after pretest counseling, knowledge (d = 0.03; lower bound of

62 In contrast, rats given pretesting CRF showed facilitation of CS-elicited freezi

63 ly and crosschecked by two reviewers using a pretested data extraction form.

64 scored each article independently by using a pretested data-extraction form to identify actual overin

65 rols on overall improvement score (post-test-pretest difference, 0.74 vs. 0.07; difference between in

66 s similarly outscored 19 controls (post-test-pretest difference, 0.83 vs. 0.14; difference between in

67 Results, controlled for pretest difficulty assessment, are stated as odds improv

68 d ratios dramatically change an individual's pretest disease odds to posttest probabilities and can c

69 rpose of this study was to determine whether pretest education and counseling for breast cancer genet

70 These include an urgent need to develop pretest education for all pregnant women and consistent

71 We compared traditional pretest estimates of CAD probability with the prevalence

72 We investigated how pretesting experience affects the performance of New Cal

73 Finally, we repeated the pretraining and pretesting experiments with the central nucleus of the a

74 In a pretest for sexual behavior on the 10th day, there was n

75 mentation as a cause of noncommutability and pretest fragmentation of quantitative standards as a pot

76 s the potential for further development as a pretested, highly attenuated, intranasal vector to be av

77 in 2002-2003 highlighted the need to develop pretested human vaccine vectors that can be used in a ra

78 involves three phases: (i) habituation (or a pretest), (ii) conditioning of an association between th

79 Instruments have been developed and pretested in both English and Spanish, and interviewers

80 Pretesting inactivation of the VH or DH did not affect t

81 enetic evaluation framework included optimal pretest informed consent, post-test discussion, cascade

82 Pretest infusions of the beta1-adrenoceptor antagonist a

83 In contrast, pretest infusions of the GR agonist administered into th

84 A pretested interviewer administered structured questionna

85 Pretest intra-amygdala infusions of the Group II recepto

86 phy (SPECT), or MPS, in patients with a high pretest likelihood (>0.85) of coronary artery disease (C

87 43 women) with a predominantly intermediate pretest likelihood for CAD underwent both quantitative H

88 omatic patients with suspected CHD and a CHD pretest likelihood of 10% to 90% were recruited.

89 ands on prior CT examination (less than a 5% pretest likelihood of adrenal involvement) were studied.

90 ed tomographic angiography, determination of pretest likelihood of angiographically significant CAD b

91 96 with coronary angiography and 38 with low pretest likelihood of CAD).

92 The pretest likelihood of candidemia was 4.4%.

93 One hundred twenty patients with a low pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease and normal

94 rfusion study had either a low or a very low pretest likelihood of coronary artery disease or negativ

95 compared with SPECT, in patients matched for pretest likelihood of coronary disease (pCAD).

96 In patients with suspected CAD, the pretest likelihood of disease, a clinical assessment, be

97 The mean pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD was 53.3+/-21.4%.

98 ars [SD, 9.0]; women, 564 [46.9%] ; mean CHD pretest likelihood, 49.5% [SD, 23.8%]), number of patien

99 ng 203 patients with an intermediate or high pretest likelihood, subgroups with normal and abnormal T

100 Pretest likelihoods of CAD with >/= 50 diameter stenosis

101 context discrimination, was not affected by pretesting LPS administration.

102 ased odds of HIV infection compared with the pretest odds, the specificity of the test was lower than

103 The SBML group completed a pretest on 3 VAD self-care skills (controller, power sou

104 em reduction (12.6%); 2) instrument testing: pretesting or pilot testing (36.2%) and assessments of c

105 Pretest, perceived risks for colon cancer were significa

106 In this intermediate/high-pretest population, integration of noncontrast-enhanced

107 h image-based clinical cases of ROP during a pretest, posttest, and training chapters.

108 We conducted a longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study to estimate the

109 l was conducted in 2012 and had a randomized pretest-posttest controlled design with a 10-week follow

110 ax districts, we enrolled 98 in a randomized pretest-posttest controlled experiment starting August 1

111 We used a one-group pretest-posttest design and national survey data from 19

112 us trial conducted in 2012 used a randomized pretest-posttest design.

113 or more groups, and 405 used a single-group pretest-posttest design.

114 participated in a cross-sectionally sampled pretest-posttest evaluation of brochures, posters, and m

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

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

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

118 In this pretest-posttest study, the pretest control group (n = 3

119 onal or posttest only (n = 10), single-group pretest/posttest (n = 2), nonrandomized 2-group (n = 13)

120 ri rubric and masked to group assignment and pretesting/posttesting status.

121 Pretest predictors were examined using stepwise logistic

122 t to the applicant's prior experience and/or pretest preparation.

123 osttest likelihood of EAS to 74%, assuming a pretest prevalence of 10%.

124 The literature was reviewed to obtain pretest probabilities and likelihood ratios, which were

125 Pending further research characterizing the pretest probabilities associated with different clinical

126 d his eponymous theorem that teaches us that pretest probabilities can be altered by new information,

127 ited by a lack of data to allow us to derive pretest probabilities for diverse setting, regions and a

128 he clinician provided data needed to compute pretest probabilities from a Web-based system.

129 None of the patients with low pretest probabilities had a positive EIA, but four were

130 int of care will enable the use of real-time pretest probabilities in medical decision making.

131 We present two approaches to include pretest probabilities in the interpretation of results.

132 on the age, sex, and angina typicality-based pretest probabilities of angiographically significant CA

133 ontrast-enhanced MR imaging was favored with pretest probabilities of biliary stricture or malignancy

134 with intermediate (n=1469) and low (n=1186) pretest probabilities of CVD.

135 Pretest probabilities of different hand dominances in ep

136 es according to likelihood ratios as well as pretest probabilities using clinical scoring tools.

137 In patients with high pretest probabilities, MRCP enabled confirmation of PSC;

138 ed confirmation of PSC; in patients with low pretest probabilities, MRCP enabled exclusion of PSC.

139 cy for the diagnosis of asthma for different pretest probabilities.

140 For patients with low pretest probability (26%), strategies that used FDG-PET

141 For patients with intermediate pretest probability (55%), FDG-PET strategies cost more

142 For patients with high pretest probability (79%), strategies that used FDG-PET

143 r milliliter in patients with a low clinical pretest probability (C-PTP) and by a d-dimer level of le

144 excludes acute VTE when combined with a low pretest probability (ie, Wells DVT score <=1).

145 FDG-PET should be used selectively when pretest probability and computed tomography findings are

146 d D-dimer blood tests) for patients with low pretest probability and diagnostic techniques (compressi

147 blished based on the Bayesian combination of pretest probability and likelihood ratios of first- and

148 Twenty-one subjects with a low pretest probability and normal cardiovascular magnetic r

149 Provision of pretest probability and prescriptive advice reduced radi

150 The tool for pretest probability assessment was the aortic dissection

151 Integration of pretest probability assessment with DD testing is feasib

152 Use of pretest probability can reduce unnecessary testing.

153 Without a validated pretest probability clinical score, serosurveillance in

154 In multivariable analysis, the pretest probability estimate was not an independent pred

155 iology Foundation/American Heart Association pretest probability estimate.

156 s substantially lower than expected based on pretest probability estimates across most sex and age gr

157 mized to the intervention group received the pretest probability estimates for both acute coronary sy

158 or calf (53%), should undergo assessment of pretest probability followed by D-dimer testing and imag

159 ficile and determine the correlation between pretest probability for C. difficile infection (CDI) and

160 Pretest probability for CDI should be considered prior t

161 Patients with low to medium pretest probability for coronary artery disease (CAD) re

162 leep evaluation for any sleep disorders (low pretest probability for narcolepsy) were compared within

163 nts with central hypersomnia and thus a high pretest probability for narcolepsy, short REML remained

164 ents with stable chest pain and intermediate pretest probability for obstructive coronary artery dise

165 ble chest pain (or dyspnea) and intermediate pretest probability for obstructive coronary artery dise

166 s part of a work-up of a patient with a high pretest probability for pulmonary embolism and a positiv

167 idated clinical prediction rules to estimate pretest probability in patients in whom acute PE is bein

168 ng spirometric results, consideration of the pretest probability is an important consideration in the

169 lving stimulation of the hypothalamus if the pretest probability is sufficiently high.

170 examination can reduce a maximum US-assigned pretest probability of 17.8% (low BI-RADS 4B) to a postt

171 At a pretest probability of 22% (for example, a 65-year-old w

172 thirds of chest pain patients without a high pretest probability of a stress perfusion defect, with e

173 cluded a 100-person pictograph depicting the pretest probability of acute coronary syndrome and avail

174 e the prevalence of AMS for establishing the pretest probability of AMS, a random-effects meta-regres

175 In a symptomatic population with 50% pretest probability of asthma, optimal accuracy (68%) is

176 However, in a screening population with a 5% pretest probability of asthma, the optimum z score is -2

177 ere categorized into low, moderate, and high pretest probability of bacteremia.

178 group 1 consisted of 34 individuals with low pretest probability of CAD (<10%), and subgroup 2 compri

179 Traditional estimates of pretest probability of CAD are not predictive of MPS per

180 when healthy subjects were defined by a low pretest probability of CAD than by normal CT angiography

181 The pretest probability of CAD was determined using the Amer

182 ary nodules should begin with estimating the pretest probability of cancer from the patient's clinica

183 In 101 patients with an intermediate pretest probability of cancer, the negative predictive v

184 place jejunal biopsy in patients with a high pretest probability of CD.

185 enrolled and assigned a high, medium, or low pretest probability of CDI based on clinical evaluation,

186 One group of patients had a high pretest probability of cirrhosis because they were ident

187 tly with atypical chest pain and had a lower pretest probability of coronary artery disease compared

188 ion among patients with intermediate to high pretest probability of coronary artery disease.

189 gative CT or MR enteroclysis study where the pretest probability of Crohn disease is high.

190 The accuracy of a test depends on the pretest probability of disease.

191 se from the calculated likelihood ratios and pretest probability of disease.

192 in symptomatic patients, in conjunction with pretest probability of disease.

193 a diastolic murmur does little to change the pretest probability of dissection (positive LR, 1.4; 95%

194 The pretest probability of endometrial cancer was 3.9% (95%

195 The estimated pretest probability of falling at least once in any give

196 er to obtain an individualized estimation of pretest probability of germline PTEN mutation, we develo

197 (65%) patients were assessed as having a low pretest probability of having CDI, 34 (31%) as having a

198 e third comparison, 254 patients with a high pretest probability of having narcolepsy were compared w

199 rin-induced thrombocytopenia if the clinical pretest probability of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

200 A negative PF4/H-PaGIA result reduced the pretest probability of HIT from 1.9% to 0% (95% CI, 0-1.

201 nt COVID-19, however, depends largely on the pretest probability of infection, which is in turn defin

202 le in BCVI among trauma patients with a high pretest probability of injury.

203 ess of strategies depended critically on the pretest probability of malignancy.

204 y in MIBI-negative patients, who have a high pretest probability of MGD.

205 employing IPM in select patients with a high pretest probability of multiple gland disease (MGD).

206 he most appropriate score for evaluating the pretest probability of obstructive coronary artery disea

207 lly low weight, can significantly change the pretest probability of osteoporosis and suggest the need

208 ts or imaging studies in patients with a low pretest probability of PE and who meet all Pulmonary Emb

209 ic test in patients who have an intermediate pretest probability of PE or in patients with low pretes

210 st probability of PE or in patients with low pretest probability of PE who do not meet all Pulmonary

211 d-dimer measurement in patients with a high pretest probability of PE.

212 t in patients who have a low or intermediate pretest probability of PE.

213 ary angiography (CTPA) in patients with high pretest probability of PE.

214 -resulted in a well-calibrated estimation of pretest probability of PTEN status.

215 testing in individuals with moderate to high pretest probability of SARS-CoV-2 who test negative on A

216 s developed and found to reliably assess the pretest probability of severe ADAMTS13 deficiency (C sta

217 eserved for patients where there is a higher pretest probability of SLE.

218 A patient with 10% pretest probability of TB would have a posttest probabil

219 CT pulmonary angiographic imaging about the pretest probability of the study based on a validated de

220 epwise approach should be initiated based on pretest probability of the underlying liver disease.

221 we present an algorithm for establishing the pretest probability of TRALI as opposed to TACO.

222 When there is a low pretest probability of UTI, a negative dipstick result f

223 Positive predictive value in this high pretest probability sample was 92.1% (95% CI, 83.6%-97.0

224 Pretest Probability Score and heparin-induced thrombocyt

225 The positive predictive value of the Pretest Probability Score in identifying heparin-induced

226 Positive predictive value of Pretest Probability Score in identifying heparin-induced

227 A high genetic risk increases the pretest probability that a biomarker of early cancer is

228 oronary artery disease and intermediate/high-pretest probability underwent CMR (including CMR-MPI, MR

229 The proportion of individuals with a high pretest probability was 18% with the DF and only 1.1% wi

230 The mean pretest probability was 37 +/- 24%.

231 discordant or in patients with intermediate pretest probability who are at high risk for surgical co

232 The combination of pretest probability with first- and second-line immunoas

233 likelihood of disease increased from 43.2% (pretest probability) to 91.1% or 91.4% (posttest probabi

234 o account the patient's presenting features (pretest probability).

235 Worst-case-scenario (pretest probability, 50%) posttest probabilities were 94

236 We hypothesize that quantitative pretest probability, linked to evidence-based management

237 or patients with low, intermediate, and high pretest probability, respectively.

238 In patients with a high pretest probability, the negative predictive value of a

239 used to exclude DVT without an assessment of pretest probability.

240 or pulmonary embolism) for those with a high pretest probability.

241 ptomatic/had no previous stress test/had low pretest probability.

242 ever or leukocytosis without considering the pretest probability.

243 or the clinical context, providing a certain pretest probability.

244 scores in patients with low to intermediate pretest probability.

245 A pretested questionnaire was used to collect information

246 ow response rates; innovative techniques for pretesting questionnaires offer opportunities for improv

247 he absence of the test was compared with the pretest recommendation about chemotherapy from the field

248 was conversion from the medical oncologist's pretest recommendation for chemotherapy plus hormonal th

249 undergoing CHR assessment into 4 classes of pretest risk (6-year): low, 3.39% (95% CI, 0.96% to 11.5

250 d reclassified 91.5% of patients at moderate pretest risk (65.7% to low risk; 25.8% to high risk) wit

251 I, 11.71% to 17.99%), confirming substantial pretest risk enrichment during the recruitment of indivi

252 y and source of referral are associated with pretest risk enrichment in individuals undergoing CHR as

253 and source of referral were associated with pretest risk enrichment.

254 Importance: Pretest risk estimation is routinely used in clinical me

255 n hematology patients with a potentially low pretest risk of invasive aspergillosis following effecti

256 The low pretest risk of invasive aspergillosis in the context of

257 A patient subgroup at higher pretest risk of pathogenic mutation carriage was defined

258 gate the characteristics and determinants of pretest risk of psychosis onset in individuals undergoin

259 Main Outcomes and Measures: Pretest risk of psychosis onset in individuals undergoin

260 characteristics and specific determinants of pretest risk of psychosis onset in individuals undergoin

261 The cumulative 6-year pretest risk of psychosis was 14.55% (95% CI, 11.71% to

262 del can identify individuals at differential pretest risk of psychosis.

263 ent and to develop and externally validate a pretest risk stratification model.

264 pproximately half of patients (57% at higher pretest risk, 42% at average risk) discussed results wit

265 randomized to the educational intervention (pretest, ROP tutorial, ROP educational chapters, and pos

266 ustering within families and controlling for pretest scores and covariates.

267 ation were positively associated with higher pretest scores and having a physician who spoke English

268 opt out of learning material on the basis of pretest scores if they are already proficient in the con

269 namese was negatively associated with higher pretest scores.

270 osttest scores were approximately 1 SD above pretest scores.

271 We conducted a single pretest, single posttest quasi-experiment in a multicent

272 It was within 3x of the pretest stoichiometric requirement estimate of 3.8 L/min

273 Interviewer administered pretested structured questionnaire was used to collect d

274 d their medical charts were reviewed using a pretested structured questionnaire.

275 Further experiments established that pretest sucrose does not simply cause bees to become mor

276 and one unrewarding cue, bees that received pretest sucrose responded in a positive manner toward am

277 A cognitively pretested survey instrument was administered to 2,612 co

278 Novel but pretested survey tools were administered to 129 patient-

279 ttributable to other organisms did not alter pretest suspicion for mediastinitis (LR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.

280 ng among patients referred for CMR without a pretest suspicion of HCM.

281 icipants, patients had lower CA2+3 volume at pretest (t31 = -0.73, P = .47) and showed a significant

282 variance showed significant improvement from pretest to 6-month followup in pain (6.0 versus 3.4); se

283 lict scale score significantly improved from pretest to post-test from 34 to 19 (P < .001).

284 Team performance significantly improved from pretest to posttest (P = 0.008) regardless of the type o

285 ween the training and the transfer task from pretest to posttest and an increase in striatal activati

286 emory vividness significantly decreased from pretest to posttest and follow-up after recall+EMs relat

287 ation overlap or in striatal activation from pretest to posttest.

288 onducted with interviews, expert review, and pretesting to develop items.

289 Thus, it can be potentially implemented as a pretesting tool to identify high-risk groups for broad m

290 wise typically developing 6-y-olds in a 3-mo pretest-training-posttest design that was ecologically d

291 Pretest treatment with the adenosine receptor antagonist

292 A clinical tool using readily available pretest variables discriminates such minimal-risk patien

293 tic regression analysis was used to evaluate pretest variables to determine factors associated with m

294 tions increased from 85.1% to 87.0% overall (pretest vs. posttest; P<0.001) and from 80.6% to 82.0% f

295 e-choice questions answered correctly on the pretest was 62% and posttest was 77% (P = 0.02).

296 raphic characteristics were requested, and a pretest was administered to one half of the participants

297 All participants completed a pretest; website participants also completed a posttest

298 w predictable sequences were determined by a pretest where participants assessed "what happened next?

299 The curriculum was pretested with Native American students, medical and gen

300 east 10-12 weeks old are prepared by regular pretesting, with all procedures carried out during the l