ライフサイエンスコーパス: repeatability

1 nd model was 0.86, comparable to intraexpert repeatability.

2 0 to 0.204] mL.min(-1).cc(-1)), showing good repeatability.

3 with the latter temperature yielding better repeatability.

4 GC-MS/MS methods, which lack sensitivity and repeatability.

5 ve measures of ventilation defects and their repeatability.

6 1) K(+), and an adequate reproducibility and repeatability.

7 coxon signed-rank test were used to evaluate repeatability.

8 l response speed, actuation performance, and repeatability.

9 n in the clinically relevant range with good repeatability.

10 rger values of the radius resulted in higher repeatability.

11 AQUA II showed an excellent validity and repeatability.

12 arate examinations 1-2 weeks apart to assess repeatability.

13 tions resulted in consistent improvements in repeatability.

14 Bland-Altman analysis was used to quantify repeatability.

15 1)), recoveries in the range of 50% and good repeatability.

16 s, and wearable circuits with high yield and repeatability.

17 etween HD and non-HD PET in radiomic feature repeatability.

18 imaging sessions had higher radiomic feature repeatability.

19 spatiotemporal resolution, reversibility and repeatability.

20 significantly by reducing bias and improving repeatability.

21 ealed no difference in the results and their repeatability.

22 cision of coefficient of variation was 1.8% (repeatability, 0.6% dd-cfDNA) and was <5% for all the di

23 02 mug L(-1)) of precision (11-0.5% RSD) and repeatability (12-0.5% RSD).

24 itions optimized with recombinant alpha-syn, repeatability (2.1 and 5.4% percent relative standard de

25 ty of repeated FFR measurements (test-retest repeatability); (2) whether the extent of DeltaFFR(eng)-

26 0.1%), intermediate precision (1.0-5.2%) and repeatability (4.7-12.8%), expressed as relative standar

27 inations separated by 0-7 days to assess ADC repeatability; an additional MRI was performed after thr

28 observed in laboratory tests with acceptable repeatability and a coefficient of determination (R(2))

29 s, retinal vascular images showed the lowest repeatability and CC images showed the highest.

30 atellite panels has the potential to improve repeatability and comparative ability for commonly studi

31 methodological indicators, namely accuracy, repeatability and detection probability affected the rel

32 ional intracellular volume demonstrates high repeatability and image quality and enables better diffe

33 In this study, we determined the repeatability and inter-reader reproducibility of pancre

34 (-1)), mean recoveries (90.2 to 106.6%), and repeatability and intermediate precision (<4.5%) were ob

35 mug kg(-1)), mean recoveries (91-103%), and repeatability and intermediate precision (<5.8%) were ob

36 Repeatability and intermediate precision (given as norma

37 Estimates of repeatability and intermediate precision demonstrated th

38 The repeatability and intermediate precision expressed as th

39 Repeatability and intermediate precision in matrix showe

40 The methods' repeatability and intermediate precision relative standa

41 The repeatability and intermediate precision varied between

42 The RSDs of the repeatability and intermediate precision were below 10%.

43 ation, as well as for precision, in terms of repeatability and intermediate precision, did not exceed

44 vinegars, with values of 1.7%, and 2.3% for repeatability and intermediate precision, respectively.

45 Precision, in terms of repeatability and intermediate precision, was establishe

46 Repeatability and intra- and interlaboratory variability

47 Precision was assessed by repeatability and intra-laboratory reproducibility with

48 osed immunosensor had great reproducibility, repeatability and long-term stability.

49 variate PLS approach demonstrated acceptable repeatability and method stability (RMSECV=4.79ppm; RMSE

50 Repeatability and precision showed <9% relative standard

51 limits of quantification (LOQs), linearity, repeatability and recoveries.

52 e representative phospholipids, showing good repeatability and recovery (63-101%).

53 quantization have an effect on the level of repeatability and redundancy of features, emphasizing th

54 ted high specificity and sensitivity, stable repeatability and reliable detectable ability of TaqMan

55 ed that the proposed assays presented a good repeatability and reproducibility (<7% RSD) and mean rec

56 The method showed satisfactory repeatability and reproducibility (CV<6%).

57 were between 84 and 110%, within laboratory repeatability and reproducibility - in the range of 3.29

58 Repeatability and reproducibility assays based on this s

59 Repeatability and reproducibility had relative standard

60 The iVue SD-OCT provides good corneal ETM repeatability and reproducibility in normal and diseased

61 ies, was conducted in order to determine the repeatability and reproducibility of the method for fola

62 Low RSD values indicate the good repeatability and reproducibility of the modified electr

63 Repeatability and reproducibility results were similar,

64 Repeatability and reproducibility values were below 2%.

65 /mL, respectively, in addition to the tested repeatability and reproducibility values with a variance

66 Test-retest repeatability and reproducibility was assessed on a subs

67 O-DFA repeatability and reproducibility were excellent and unc

68 Repeatability and reproducibility were excellent in both

69 Repeatability and reproducibility were similar in all su

70 le method that yields results of appropriate repeatability and reproducibility.

71 y was assessed with statistical estimates of repeatability and reproducibility.

72 -run and inter-run results showed good assay repeatability and reproducibility.

73 le with other commercial kits demonstrating: repeatability and reproducibility; precision (maximum s.

74 omparable in both scales, implying excellent repeatability and scalability of the process.

75 nosensor was examined in terms of stability, repeatability and selectivity.

76 In addition, GO-PEI-Carr exhibited a unique repeatability and stability even after enrichment of gly

77 Recoveries were in the range 60-111%, repeatability and within laboratory reproducibility were

78 ivity, (2) selectivity, (3) specificity, (4) repeatability, and (5) good limit of detection.

79 sed method exhibits proper sensitivity, good repeatability, and acceptable applicability for the dete

80 ated by determining the linearity, accuracy, repeatability, and assay stability.

81 was estimated to assess reproducibility and repeatability, and features with ICCs greater than or eq

82 0), was also evaluated in terms of accuracy, repeatability, and interday precision.

83 tivity, linearity in working range, intraday repeatability, and intraday precision in order to quanti

84 Bland-Altman plots, coefficients of repeatability, and Pearson correlation results were repo

85 e, a limit of detection equal to 0.025 ppmv, repeatability, and reproducibility better than 3.2%, plu

86 al workflows that guarantee reproducibility, repeatability, and result provenance are essential requi

87 sors exhibit good flexibility, linear range, repeatability, and stability that are suitable for futur

88 AR immunosensor showed good reproducibility, repeatability, and storage stability (75% of initial act

89 ules (such as antibodies and proteins), good repeatability, and wide range of clinical applications a

90 The accuracy and repeatability are approaching values consistent with mea

91 Reproducibility and repeatability are considerably higher in solid brain com

92 lectivity, and excellent reproducibility and repeatability, are appropriate for potassium analysis in

93 The repeatability as measured by intraclass correlation coef

94 ified protocol displayed high overall method repeatability, as assessed using pooled plasma and serum

95 on and repeatability limit were computed for repeatability assessment.

96 OCT-derived ellipzoid zone (EZ) metrics with repeatability assessments.

97 Repeatability (based on random error of repeated scans)

98 KE had reduced repeatability because of suboptimal segmentation methods

99 Repeatability between native baseline measurements was h

100 all levels and there was very good technical repeatability between the morning and afternoon imaging

101 and their measurement errors (intra subject repeatability) calculated.

102 Repeatability, calculated as relative standard deviation

103 gray-level run emphasis features showed poor repeatability (CCC values < 0.52) when extracted from VO

104 -subject coefficient of variation (wCV), and repeatability coefficient (r) were recorded.

105 thin-subject coefficient of variation (wCV), repeatability coefficient (RC), and Bland-Altman analysi

106 nearity (coefficient of determination R(2)), repeatability (coefficient of variation RSD), limit of d

107 was inferior to that of simplified methods (repeatability coefficients > 36% vs. < 28%, respectively

108 Repeatability was analyzed using repeatability coefficients (RC) and intraclass correlati

109 Bland-Altman plots and repeatability coefficients were also produced.

110 ity (R(2) >/= 0.90) for 75.3% and acceptable repeatability (coefficients of variance </=30%) for 84.5

111 , including spatial resolution, accuracy and repeatability, compare imaging data generated with our d

112 ometry parameters showed significantly worse repeatability compared to controls (TI > 0.36).

113 The BH technique suffers from reduced repeatability compared with gas inhalation techniques; h

114 66 non-HD PET, and 6 CT features showed high repeatability (concordance correlation coefficient >= 0.

115 , separation efficiency, and precision under repeatability conditions of measurement, which is a nece

116 To determine whether BAT radiomic feature repeatability correlates with BAT SUV(max) repeatability

117 Analytical protocol was optimized for good repeatability (CV < 10%) and high sensitivity.

118 reconstructions, though with no significant repeatability differences (all P values >= 0.08) between

119 T reconstructions, again with no significant repeatability differences (all P values >= 0.14) between

120 ak) (9.2%-11.3%), though without significant repeatability differences (all P values >= 0.23).

121 meability, flame-retardency, durability, and repeatability features, the 3D F-TENG may have great pot

122 The coefficients of repeatability for automated and standard GAT were 3.8 an

123 ermore, the sensor showed high precision and repeatability for detection of alpha-syn oligomer in ser

124 oducibility was 0.890, and for intraoperator repeatability for Operator #1 and Observer #2 were 0.922

125 d higher BH activation strength, volume, and repeatability for the combined multi-echo (MEC) data com

126 cal figures of merit including linearity and repeatability for the tested compounds were found accept

127 Small lesions (<4.2 cm(3)) had worse repeatability for volume measurements.

128 Intrascanner repeatability half-widths of the confidence intervals fo

129 e accuracy and reliability of results, since repeatability has been a problem in studies utilizing fu

130 ce including excellent reproducibility, good repeatability, high selectivity and long storage stabili

131 arized (3)He MRI-based VDP demonstrated good repeatability (ICC = 0.91 and 0.95, respectively; P <= .

132 aphy showed excellent inter- and intrareader repeatability (ICC, 0.84-0.99) for all variables assesse

133 Purpose To evaluate the repeatability, image quality, and diagnostic utility of

134 In addition, this study assessed repeatability in 51 patients (56 years +/- 14) who under

135 x-matched healthy controls, with scan-rescan repeatability in a subcohort.

136 ~20 times) while retaining the stability and repeatability in addition to enhancement in the sensitiv

137 ieved at a few tens of seconds and excellent repeatability in exposure to the methanol vapour.

138 DC is a robust imaging metric with excellent repeatability in extracranial soft tissues across a wide

139 Intrareader repeatability in fibrosis quantification was higher for

140 erior astigmatism showed significantly worse repeatability in moderate keratoconus.

141 Repeatability in subclinical keratoconus did not differ

142 The intra-day and inter-day assay repeatability, in the analysis of real samples was less

143 d furan aldehydes) with regard to linearity, repeatability, inter and intra-day precision and accurac

144 res and preprocessing combinations with high repeatability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient > 0.85

145 deviation (Pearson r = 0.819 and 0.831), and repeatability (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.9

146 Repeatability (intragrader and intrasession) and reprodu

147 For such biomarkers to be useful, repeatability is a basic requirement, meaning its value

148 Conclusion MR imaging repeatability is better for global texture parameters th

149 Run-to-run repeatability is explored using nine consecutive electro

150 0.85), our results indicate that overall the repeatability is highly sensitive to the processing para

151 ithout an isotopically labeled standard, the repeatability is poor, even after normalization to the s

152 For all eyes, the repeatability limit of the location of Kmax was 0.82 mm

153 The within-subject standard deviation and repeatability limit were computed for repeatability asse

154 essed by within-subject standard deviations, repeatability limits (r), and intraclass correlation coe

155 Excellent linearity (R(2) > 0.9999), repeatability (<3.55%), and accuracy (<7.18%) were obtai

156 Repeatability, measured using the intra-class correlatio

157 Conclusion: Repeatability measurements for PET/CT test-retest with (

158 Conclusion: Repeatability measurements for PET/CT test-retests with

159 model that estimated the uncertainty in ADC repeatability measurements therefore taking into conside

160 ay (ELISA), including higher sensitivity and repeatability, minimum sample preparation, simplicity, a

161 tep in VD calculation significantly improved repeatability, normal population variation, and correlat

162 ation procedures, they also showed very good repeatability not only from measurement to measurement b

163 formula, yielding recoveries of 86%-98% with repeatabilities of 3.5-6.3 RSD%.

164 of these quantitative data, we evaluated the repeatability of (18)F-FLT PET as part of a multicenter

165 e purpose of this study was to determine the repeatability of (68)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC in a test-retest tr

166 The purpose of this study was to determine repeatability of (68)Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC in a test-retest tr

167 imit of detection of 3.0 mug L(-1) As(V) and repeatability of 1.8% (n = 5, 25 mug L(-1) As(V)) and 2.

168 ning the limit of detection (LOD) as well as repeatability of 35 food contact materials-related subst

169 of 0.75 to 100 muM, reproducibility of 3.0%, repeatability of 9.2%, and a detection limit of ~0.75 mu

170 onstrained by the data, we obtain time-lapse repeatability of about 2% in the model domain-a threshol

171 The aim of this study was to assess the repeatability of activated brown adipose tissue (BAT) ra

172 To explore the speed and repeatability of adaptation, we examined the divergence

173 We compared repeatability of ADC measurements corrected for motion a

174 Poor quality and low repeatability of additively manufactured parts are key t

175 s, leading to low sequence coverage and poor repeatability of analyses.

176 ver, statistical data on reproducibility and repeatability of any quantitative method is essential fo

177 Evaluate agreement and repeatability of axial length (AL), corneal curvature, a

178 study aimed to determine the sensitivity and repeatability of BH activation and CVR using a multiband

179 g density, external load, particle size, and repeatability of energy recoverability of hydrogels are

180 Intrasubject repeatability of epithelial indices was assessed and cor

181 High repeatability of epithelial thickness measurements may b

182 As such it can improve comparability and repeatability of experiments and in longer perspective h

183 Here, we demonstrate the across-year repeatability of exploration behavior and aggressiveness

184 our sensor offers several advantages such as repeatability of fabrication, wide operating range and s

185 rwent two VERDICT MRI acquisitions to assess repeatability of FIC measurements obtained with VERDICT

186 We estimated the repeatability of foraging trips and used a hidden Markov

187 The repeatability of full kinetic modeling parameters was in

188 Repeatability of full-field static perimetry (SP) and be

189 We demonstrate the use of repeatability of gene expression and splicing to identif

190 thin versus between-individual variation and repeatability of gene expression.

191 The intraobserver repeatability of generating quantitative metrics was als

192 The intraobserver repeatability of generating the quantitative metrics was

193 The precision and repeatability of in vivo biological studies is predicate

194 Finally, the repeatability of individual quantitative uptake metrics

195 ch, normalization significantly improves the repeatability of intensity features from T2-weighted FLA

196 omography angiography (OCTA) images, but the repeatability of metrics produced from various binarizat

197 marily with the lack of interpretability and repeatability of ML-generated results, which may limit t

198 Repeatability of most parameters worsened in moderate di

199 rface for the uncertainty of coordinates and repeatability of nutrient concentration measurement, usi

200 This study set out to examine the repeatability of OCTA quantification metrics produced us

201 The repeatability of PET and low-dose CT features should be

202 within and between individual variation and repeatability of platelet RNA expression and exon skippi

203 this study was to evaluate the intrasession repeatability of pupil size measurements provided by a m

204 The aim of this study was to investigate the repeatability of quantitative PET/CT measurements using

205 of this study was to assess the test-retest repeatability of radiomic features extracted from (18)F-

206 The repeatability of radiomic features extracted from each m

207 In this study we assessed the repeatability of radiomics features on small prostate tu

208 We investigated repeatability of radiomics features under various prepro

209 erature investigates the reproducibility and repeatability of relaxometry methods in MRI.

210 The repeatability of RNFL thickness predictions was investig

211 r the assignment of measures associated with repeatability of samples, revealed that variability betw

212 design and performance, we also evaluate the repeatability of SEOP experiments conducted using this n

213 The repeatability of SUV(peak), TLU, and all patient-level m

214 Reproducibility and repeatability of T1 and T2 measures in the human brain v

215 study provides values on reproducibility and repeatability of T1 and T2 relaxometry measured with fas

216 Over the follow-up, the repeatability of test results (both 24-2 and 10-2 abnorm

217 Results of selectivity and repeatability of the aptasensor were satisfactory.

218 The stability and repeatability of the developed EESI-TOF-MS were tested u

219 clusion: For solid tumors of the pelvis, the repeatability of the evaluated SUV and ADC metrics on (1

220 elation coefficient was used to estimate the repeatability of the extracted radiomic features.

221 eved using the optimum-sized cartridge and a repeatability of the extraction procedure of 0.06-1.95%

222 isitions were used to assess the test-retest repeatability of the GPD and vessel density percentages.

223 The repeatability of the method (RSD%, n = 6) was lower than

224 Repeatability of the method is better than 12.8% (%RSD),

225 However, such instruments prioritize the repeatability of the process over a more thoughtful and

226 loid burden and to measure the intraobserver repeatability of the quantitative metrics.

227 ectrodes plays a major role by hindering the repeatability of the results and bringing a number of di

228 it is possible to significantly improve the repeatability of the technique by incorporating a liquid

229 patient depends strongly on the precision or repeatability of the test.

230 The intra-session repeatability of the XyCAM RI was high with a coefficien

231 this study was to determine the test-retest repeatability of these metrics on PET/MRI, with comparis

232 arrays demonstrated the high sensitivity and repeatability of this approach.

233 Purpose To evaluate the reproducibility and repeatability of two-dimensional fast imaging with stead

234 d function (PSF) image reconstruction on the repeatability of uptake metrics was evaluated.

235 h highly advantageous in terms of stability, repeatability, online remote monitoring, fast response,

236 zone averaging yielded clinically acceptable repeatability only in eyes with Kmax <=50 diopters (D),

237 The repeatability or predictability of evolution is a centra

238 ved, and this study did not demonstrate high repeatability or reproducibility for quantitative assess

239 e repeatability correlates with BAT SUV(max) repeatability, participants were stratified based on the

240 Hierarchical clustering of the high-repeatability PET features resulted in 10 highly correla

241 ies (87%) exhibited centroid mass laboratory repeatability precisions of < s(Lab)> <= (0.15 +/- 0.01)

242 apse field surveys that included substantial repeatability problems across a 17-month survey gap.

243 del parameters (actuator backlash, and stage repeatability 'r') from computed pairwise translations a

244 reliability of eDNA quantification hinged on repeatability, reflected by the scattering (r(2) = 0.87)

245 Repeatability, reliability, reproducibility, and anti-in

246 iosensor was examined in terms of stability, repeatability, reproducibility and reusability.

247 d terpenoids were quantified with acceptable repeatability, reproducibility, sensitivity, and accurac

248 sults in terms of linearity (r(2) > 0.9980), repeatability (RSD <= 3%), recovery (>=89%) and LOQ (<=2

249 Excellent repeatability (RSD = 0.4%, N = 10) and limit of detectio

250 The obtained results proved sufficient repeatability (RSD = 2.4%), reproducibility (RSD = 2.56%

251 e described method demonstrates satisfactory repeatability (RSD = 2.6%), with an intermediate precisi

252 and groundwater), and thereby validated for repeatability (RSD% 1-10%), accuracy (+/-1.0-15%), and l

253 A limit of detection of 0.9 ng L(-1) and repeatability (RSD) of 2% at 100 ng L(-1) were achieved.

254 /2002 revealed good linearity (R(2) > 0.99), repeatability (RSDr < 15%), reproducibility (RSDR < 15%)

255 The results for repeatability (RSDs <= 4%) and intermediate precision (R

256 o, enrichment factors were 62-66 with proper repeatability (%RSDs < 6.8, n = 3).

257 tions in terms of recovery (86.6-104.5%) and repeatability (%RSDs < 7.8, n = 3, C = 15 and 30 ug g(-1

258 MEC CVR also had higher repeatability, sensitivity, specificity, and reliability

259 Besides, the reproducibility, repeatability, stability, and interference measurements

260 red on Kmax yielded a greater improvement in repeatability than axial zone averages and reached clini

261 PET(OSEM) images showed significantly better repeatability than features extracted from PET(PSF) imag

262 Shape features showed a higher repeatability than intensity (adjusted P < .001) and tex

263 The 3- x 3-mm scans resulted in higher repeatability than the 6- x 6-mm scans.

264 showed that the GPD percentage had superior repeatability than the vessel density percentage in most

265 area relative to the volume along with more repeatability, the application of NPs in electrochemical

266 Despite high repeatability, the observed between-year variation of sp

267 h a fast response, significant stability and repeatability, the proposed sensor holds practical imple

268 The intra- and interday repeatability values (RSD %) were 0.26-0.41% for retenti

269 We provide reference repeatability values and scale independent analysis of r

270 dless of the sample matrix constituents with repeatability values better than 13%.

271 The ICC for intersoftware repeatability was 1.

272 Repeatability was 82% for Ora-VCF(TM) test and 92% for O

273 to instantaneous Kmax, clinically acceptable repeatability was achieved with instantaneous zone avera

274 Repeatability was analyzed using repeatability coefficie

275 Repeatability was assessed as coefficient of variation (

276 Repeatability was assessed by within-subject standard de

277 Repeatability was assessed for 46 texture features, and

278 Repeatability was assessed using percentage difference,

279 Repeatability was assessed with inter- and intraobserver

280 Results Repeatability was better for global parameters than for

281 Repeatability was better in AQUA II (95% confidence inte

282 referred for multicenter studies because its repeatability was both high and robust to different imag

283 termined by including subjective grading and repeatability was determined by evaluating the 20 additi

284 Intraobserver repeatability was excellent, with less than a 2% coeffic

285 Intragrader repeatability was generally greater than intergrader val

286 Repeatability was highly variable among features.

287 Procedural repeatability was less than 5% RSD, and limits of detect

288 Repeatability was measured with use of intraclass correl

289 A good repeatability was observed from the analysis of six repl

290 Feature repeatability was significantly higher for PET than for

291 features were extracted from both VOIs, and repeatability was then assessed using the Lin concordanc

292 ecisions of the proposed method expressed as repeatability were 0.92, 2.2, and 3.7% RSD for 2 ug L(-1

293 tudy, excellent selectivity, peak shape, and repeatability were achieved by combining achiral and chi

294 and hepatic PDFF intra- and interexamination repeatability were assessed by using intraclass correlat

295 ducibility (CAP and PDFF) and within-session repeatability were assessed with linear regression analy

296 as well as across repetitions on a scanner (repeatability) were analyzed.

297 ted organism and showed similar accuracy and repeatability, whilst the limit of detection was clearly

298 -1), providing higher accuracy and intra-day repeatability with a mean percentage error of 18.7% and

299 ning a high working stability up to 10 h and repeatability with an RSD of 1.1% (n = 12), as well as a

300 98) in a wide linear range of 0.1-2000 ng/g, repeatability with RSDs < 10%, reproducibility RSDs < 20