ライフサイエンスコーパス: wait

1 went organ-preservation strategy ("Watch and Wait").

2 ded from the list at least once during their wait.

3 e date of the decision to commence watch and wait.

4 ded from the list at least once during their wait.

5 t outside perspectives, elected to watch-and-wait.

6 With watchful waiting, 39% ultimately required repair (14% emergent) a

7 As a result, such patients wait a median of 3.9 years to receive a donor kidney, by

8 However, those who declined IRD kidneys waited a median 9.6 months for a non-IRD kidney transpla

9 sed via the 2-week-wait pathway using 2-week-wait age-specific and stage-specific breakdowns.

10 sk of graft loss, even though candidates may wait an indefinite time for a subsequent organ offer.

11 sk of graft loss, even though candidates may wait an indefinite time for a subsequent organ offer.

12 re-microtubule interactions and generates a "wait anaphase" delay when any defects are apparent [1-3]

13 Therefore, we should be cautious in applying wait and see strategies.

14 Since patients with wait and see treatment do not have a starting date of tr

15 Watch-and-wait and treated cohorts had similar rates of admission

16 mpact of each intervention on queue-adjusted wait and turnaround time compared with historical contro

17 early initiation of treatment rather than a wait and watch strategy, and establish whether new levod

18 he emergency department to be treated with a wait-and-see approach (delayed-cardioversion group) or e

19 The wait-and-see approach involved initial treatment with ra

20 The traditional wait-and-see approach with prolonged bedrest was replace

21 nt clinical practice guidelines recommend a "wait-and-watch" approach for tumor recurrence.

22 ts with rectal cancer managed by a watch-and-wait approach could be reduced if they achieve and maint

23 Watch-and-wait approach in rectal cancer relies on the identificat

24 WHO recommends that women wait at least 2 years after a livebirth and at least 6 m

25 Fourteen candidates were still waiting at 9 centers on December 31, 2017.

26 s suggest that albanerpetontids were sit-and-wait ballistic tongue feeders, extending the record of t

27 ng early vs delayed transplantation (6-month wait before placement on the waitlist) and life years lo

28 We show first that kinesin waits before forward steps for less time than before bac

29 al modelling using the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD), which is a large-scale registry of

30 Given the waitlist outcomes (continued waiting, death, and transplantation), we aimed to identi

31 ew research reveals that cells often fail to wait for all chromosomes to properly attach to the spind

32 r, candidates who decline a DCD50 offer must wait for an uncertain future offer.

33 rimenter that they can eat it immediately or wait for an unspecified duration of time (which can be c

34 Mice were trained to suppress licking and wait for cues that marked the delivery of water.

35 uggest that it may be a feasible approach to wait for genetic and other laboratory test results so th

36 If only 30% of tested persons would wait for results, the prevalence reduction was only 1.6%

37 ich animals decide how patiently they should wait for reward, and how vigorously they should move to

38 ac arrest do not receive lay rescuer CPR and wait for the arrival of professional emergency rescuers.

39 rons in the cerebral cortex of mammals might wait for years before they become activated and finish t

40 participants stood on the force platform and waited for the instruction of taking a step while experi

41 ered by such tools, others remain sceptical, waiting for a clear impact to be shown in drug discovery

42 outcomes of accepting a DCD SLKT now versus waiting for a DND SLKT in patients waitlisted for SLKT,

43 didates for heart transplantation or who are waiting for a suitable donor.

44 based schedules for care, and experiences of waiting for care and of staff limiting their time with t

45 ance to multiple antibiotics may necessitate waiting for culture-based diagnostics to select an effec

46 Although not accepting DCD SLKT and waiting for DND SLKT is the preferred option for patient

47 Waiting for DND SLKT was the preferred treatment strateg

48 oach to addressing environmental change than waiting for full-scale environmental law reform.

49 While waiting for further external validation, the CLIV Score

50 access to donor organs, high mortality while waiting for kidney transplant, and inferior graft surviv

51 on in PD+HS when viewing erotic images after waiting for longer periods of time.

52 However, plating, inoculating, and waiting for microbes to develop colonies that are visibl

53 ept that apoptotic cells are not inert cells waiting for removal, but instead release metabolites as

54 se attention towards vaccination of patients waiting for SOT.

55 Several options are possible, including waiting for spontaneous delivery with temporary LMWH int

56 s reduce drug development time compared with waiting for the intended clinical outcomes.

57 , the maturing particles did not stall while waiting for the platform domain to mature and instead re

58 While waiting for the results of ongoing randomized trials, pe

59 gs suggest that after V1 damage, rather than waiting for vision to stabilize, early training interven

60 How the motor waits for ATP to bind to the leading head is controversi

61 tective silk cocoon of an Ectatomma pupa and waits for the emergence of the young ant before leaving

62 nd detachments; second, we show that kinesin waits for the same amount of time before backsteps and d

63 onsumers are present, (2) grazing or sit-and-wait foraging strategies are common, and (3) species eng

64 nt to Milan and UCSF criteria recipients who waited >9 months from LRT.

65 More patients of high-testing physicians waited >= 30 days and >= 90 days to undergo surgery (31.

66 rgery, calculated the proportion of patients waiting >= 30 days or >= 90 days for surgery, and determ

67 s structural and functional underpinnings of waiting impulsivity and tics using multi-modal neuroimag

68 hat unmedicated TD patients showed increased waiting impulsivity compared to controls, which was inde

69 Overall, the results suggest that waiting impulsivity in TD was related to tic severity, t

70 Waiting impulsivity in unmedicated patients with TD also

71 ated with premature responding, the index of waiting impulsivity on the 4CSRTT.

72 o increased reactivity to imminent handling, waiting impulsivity, and enhanced motivation for reward.

73 Tic severity did not account directly for waiting impulsivity, but this effect was mediated by con

74 association with myelination was specific to waiting impulsivity: R1 was not associated with decision

75 e study (d = -0.47) and were less willing to wait in a persistence task (d = -0.39).

76 th another mission and is unique, as it will wait in space for a yet-to-be-discovered comet.

77 t consider supportive treatment and watchful waiting in stable patients until the causative pathogen

78 A 2-month delay in 2-week-wait investigatory referrals results in an estimated los

79 Watch and wait is a novel management strategy in patients with rec

80 ioperative mortality or recurrence, watchful waiting is preferred.

81 Recent data suggest watchful waiting is safe; however, long-term clinical and economi

82 e of organ scarcity and capable of improving wait list survival, confers a significantly higher risk

83 ol group (eg, usual care, attention control, wait list) were included.

84 ient survival compared with remaining on the waiting list (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.58; 95% confidenc

85 ctive potential for 3-month mortality on the waiting list (area under the curve [AUC], vWF-Ag = 0.739

86 onprofit dialysis facilities: deceased donor waiting list (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0

87 d exposure therapy (n = 36) versus treatment waiting list (n = 30).

88 3 patients on the National Kidney Transplant Waiting List (NKTWL) are suspended from the list at leas

89 3 patients on the National Kidney Transplant Waiting List (NKTWL) is suspended from the list at least

90 0 years compared with those remaining on the waiting list (WL) according to their comorbidities.

91 ansplant, 5669 (60%) died (2644 while on the waiting list and 3025 after being delisted).

92 icantly higher rate of mortality both on the waiting list and following transplantation.

93 on (LT) during adolescence, disparity on the waiting list and post-LT outcome for young adults compar

94 We analyzed OPTN data that included waiting list and transplant characteristics, geographica

95 age, 52 years; 26% women) on the transplant waiting list at 113 centers, 19 815 (68%) underwent hear

96 Fifty candidates have been added to the waiting list at 15 centers.

97 Time spent on the waiting list before liver transplantation (LT) provides

98 ither the EuroFIT intervention or a 12-month waiting list comparison group.

99 ingly, patients dying within 3 months on the waiting list displayed elevated levels of vWF-Ag (P < 0.

100 kinetics in patients on a kidney transplant waiting list do not appear to be related to the interval

101 bsequent mortality in patients on the active waiting list for a deceased donor SOT and recipients wit

102 egistration of a transplant candidate on the waiting list for an organ and the date of the first tran

103 including a decline in patients added to the waiting list for liver transplantation for hepatitis C.

104 ecutive patients with ILD referred or on the waiting list for lung transplantation from May 2013 to D

105 rogate marker for risk stratification on the waiting list for OLT.

106 -organ damage resulting in registration on a waiting list for or receiving a solid organ transplantat

107 y kidney transplant candidates placed on the waiting list for primary listing from 2001 to 2015.

108 n organ donors and patients on the recipient waiting list grows, residents of the United States who a

109 priorities for future outcome reporting were waiting list length (56%), the quality of hospital facil

110 nt candidates with minimal impact on overall waiting list mortality and posttransplant outcomes.

111 Waiting list mortality was not different across eras (14

112 on of kidneys from 2200 deceased donors to a waiting list of 5500 patients and produced estimates of

113 The number of new waiting list registrations decreased, with the Northeast

114 ith living donor transplantation, death, and waiting list removal as competing events.

115 t for patients with lower estimated expected waiting list survival without transplant (29% at high su

116 between survival after heart transplant and waiting list survival without transplant at 5 years.

117 bloc transplantation versus remaining on the waiting list using the sequential Cox approach.

118 e incidence of transplantation or being on a waiting list was 0.54% (95% CI 0.40-0.67) for kidney tra

119 nal dysfunction on the liver transplant (LT) waiting list was obtained from Organ Procurement and Tra

120 ipient's status on the heart transplantation waiting list was updated to reflect a willingness to acc

121 aracteristics, MELD-Na, and mortality on the waiting list were recorded.

122 ver, seven lung) and 67 were registered on a waiting list without receiving a transplant (21 kidney,

123 quently either died or were removed from the waiting list without receiving a transplant.

124 0 years old on dialysis and placed on the KT waiting list, 1084 received a first KT from a deceased d

125 nts (8.2%) were placed on the deceased donor waiting list, 23 762 (1.6%) received a living donor kidn

126 ocess, including access to a transplantation waiting list, access to transplantation once waitlisted,

127 on the deceased donor kidney transplantation waiting list, receipt of a living donor kidney transplan

128 a transplant and patients who remain on the waiting list.

129 ion scores for individuals on the transplant waiting list.

130 while waiting or have been removed from the waiting list.

131 ion scores for individuals on the transplant waiting list.

132 ival after dropout from the liver transplant waiting list.

133 hly effective in preventing mortality on the waiting list.

134 0 older children die on the liver transplant waiting list.

135 rease, if not eliminate, the pediatric liver waiting list.

136 and 1 month following cessation of treatment/waiting list.

137 waiting liver transplantation, prediction of wait-list (WL) mortality is adjudicated by the Model for

138 tives: To identify variables associated with wait-list and post-transplant mortality for CF lung tran

139 LAS wait-list and post-transplant survival models were recal

140 io, Canada, and to understand the drivers of wait-list mortality and hospitalization due to heart fai

141 PD) candidates was associated with increased wait-list mortality risk (HR 2.6; CI 1.2-5.4).

142 ver 12 months (HR 1.7; CI 1.0-2.8) increased wait-list mortality risk; pulmonary exacerbation time 15

143 ents awaiting lung transplantation face high wait-list mortality, as injury precludes the use of most

144 ailure-related hospitalizations while on the wait-list.

145 ations related to heart failure while on the wait-list.

146 significantly improved prediction of 3-month waiting-list mortality (AUC, MELD-Na-vWF = 0.804).

147 p to prioritize organ allocation to decrease waiting-list mortality.

148 Prediction of 3-month waiting-list survival was assessed by receiver operating

149 duction of the activity resulting in doubled waiting-list.

150 incident adult kidney transplant candidates wait listed in 2011 and 2015 (pre-KAS and post-KAS cohor

151 ikely benefit United States patients who are wait listed.

152 Liver Disease (MELD) in 8387 French patients wait-listed between 2009 and 2014.

153 ific variables improved discrimination among wait-listed CF candidates and benefited COPD candidates.

154 ntervention (ie, the intervention arm) or be wait-listed for the intervention after the trial (ie, th

155 nters make decisions about organs offered to wait-listed patients and how they relate to disparities

156 es on the probability of transplantation for wait-listed patients remains unclear.

157 y (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.96) to be wait-listed than WH even after adjusting for medical fac

158 d donor kidney transplants within 3 years of wait listing more frequently post-KAS (22%) than pre-KAS

159 nor kidney transplantation within 3 years of wait listing using competing risk regression, with livin

160 Racial disparity in kidney transplant wait-listing persisted even after adjusting for medical

161 Transplant wait-listing rates were calculated using US Renal Data S

162 egies shown to be associated with increasing wait-listing rates.

163 lysis centers were associated with increased wait-listing rates.

164 s that impact racial disparity in transplant wait-listing.

165 ng education strategies leading to increased wait-listing.

166 The gap between patients on transplant waiting lists and available donor organs is steadily inc

167 Patients on organ transplant waiting lists are evaluated for preexisting alloimmunity

168 nd unacceptably high mortality on transplant waiting lists, we discuss different systems used interna

169 Patients with antibodies to HLA wait longer for transplant and are at increased risk of

170 They were willing to wait longer to see trained practitioners.

171 ing to wait time because candidates who have waited longer have higher priority.

172 Patients listed by the adult team (n = 14) waited longer than those listed by the pediatric team (1

173 found that parents were more risk averse and waited longer to return in smaller than larger species,

174 t survival probabilities were more cautious, waiting longer before returning to the nest to provide c

175 brain regions responding more robustly after waiting longer to view the erotic image.

176 an online portal (utility, -.57) if made to wait more than 6 days to get results in the office and m

177 ts compared to healthy controls, we assessed waiting motor impulsivity using a behavioral task, as we

178 hip nectar has a sedimentation problem while waiting on the market shelf during the sale, for solving

179 isease (that could be managed using watchful waiting or active surveillance).

180 35% of transplant candidates have died while waiting or have been removed from the waiting list.

181 runs, and (2) time needed to complete a run (waiting or residence time).

182 nation had no effect on queue-adjusted image wait (P > .99) or turnaround time (P = .6).

183 Delays in presentation via the 2-week-wait pathway over a 3-month lockdown period (with an ave

184 e I-III cancer were diagnosed via the 2-week-wait pathway per month, of whom 1691 (27%) would be pred

185 cers at stage I-III diagnosed via the 2-week-wait pathway using 2-week-wait age-specific and stage-sp

186 al procedures take <30 min per mouse, with a wait period of 2 weeks between axonal injury and tracing

187 No PV reconnections occurred during the waiting period and adenosine testing.

188 haring (OPTN/UNOS) policy mandates a 6-month waiting period before exception scores are granted to li

189 Extending the waiting period by 4 weeks following RCT has no influence

190 A safe waiting period of 17-18 d after final insecticide applic

191 After a 30-minute waiting period, adenosine testing (30 mg) was used to re

192 with a ramping-up of firing rate during the waiting period, but no general overrepresentation of goa

193 utilize nonsurgical modalities to bridge the waiting period.

194 B or O may experience a significantly longer waiting period.

195 included and randomized into a 7- or 11-week waiting period.

196 Safe waiting periods were found to be 1-3d.

197 Consequently, a watch-and-wait policy for sporadic asymptomatic cPanNENs <=2 cm se

198 ends in use of active surveillance, watchful waiting, radiotherapy, and surgical management of locali

199 ata for cancer diagnoses made via the 2-week-wait referral pathway in 2013-16 from the Cancer Waiting

200 d with LT overall, but a significant sex and wait region interaction (P = 0.006) identified lower LT

201 nths in long wait regions, 6.5 months in mid wait regions (MWR), and 2.6 months in short wait regions

202 wait regions (MWR), and 2.6 months in short wait regions (SWR).

203 Short (SWR), mid (MWR), and long (LWR) UNOS wait regions comprised 25%, 42%, and 33% of the cohort.

204 Median time to LT was 12.8 months in long wait regions, 6.5 months in mid wait regions (MWR), and

205 interventions include designating areas for waiting rooms for influenza-like illnesses, altering sta

206 fore and after implementation of the 6-month waiting rule.

207 ermine that the rear kinesin head in the ATP waiting state is unbound but not displaced from its prev

208 eld over the structure of a dimer in the ATP waiting state.

209 meters differ qualitatively depending on the waiting states.

210 who were subsequently managed by a watch-and-wait strategy between Nov 25, 1991, and Dec 31, 2015.

211 response who had been managed by a watch-and-wait strategy.

212 therapy who have been managed by a watch-and-wait strategy.

213 rolled trials have indicated that a watchful waiting strategy (in the absence of life-threatening con

214 o LRT, pathologic tumor number and size, and wait time >12 months.

215 was to evaluate how regional differences in wait time affect outcomes for HCC patients.

216 Appropriately selected SDLs can decrease wait time and provide substantial long-term survival ben

217 gorithms to the radiologist can reduce image wait time and turnaround times.(C) RSNA, 2021See also th

218 We weighted demand according to wait time because candidates who have waited longer have

219 o 34 in April 2020 (P < .001), and a rise in wait time between scheduled flights from 1.5 hours in Ap

220 Wait time did not predict posttransplant survival.

221 The median wait time from first contact to possible buprenorphine i

222 Children's wait time has been viewed as a good indicator of their l

223 Wait time inequality affects waitlist mortality and inte

224 Additional refinements based on AFP and wait time may further improve post-LT outcomes in down-s

225 s were compared between shortest and longest wait time quartiles.

226 t survival compared with many of the shorter wait time regions (P < 0.05).

227 with increased regional wait time with long wait time regions 1, 5, and 9 having significantly lower

228 The median wait time to the first appointment was 6 days (interquar

229 However, a reduction in queue-adjusted wait time was observed between negative (15.45 minutes;

230 Reduced wait time was present for all order classes but was grea

231 t survival decreased with increased regional wait time with long wait time regions 1, 5, and 9 having

232 age availability date dataset, resulting in "wait time" estimates for four key early season forage sp

233 MC, successful down-staging is predicted by wait time, alpha-fetoprotein response to LRT, and tumor

234 After adjusting for surgical wait time, the odds ratio decreased to 1.07 (95% CI, 1.0

235 ative correlation with 1 factor: mean kidney waiting time (Spearman coefficient -0.388).

236 ative correlation with 1 factor: mean kidney waiting time (Spearman coefficient -0.388).

237 whether the NLA had improved WL survival and waiting time (WT) to transplantation.

238 was 7 ((interquartile range [IQR]: 6-11) and waiting time 78.5 days (IQR: 29.5-237.5).

239 , restricted to recipients with >=90 days of waiting time and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration ra

240 s process that is dictated by an exponential waiting time distribution between basal Ada expression e

241 ffusion model at approximating the empirical waiting time distribution.

242 amics of feedback loops, illustrate that the waiting time distributions of each molecule are a signat

243 tial rurality status does not portend longer waiting time for KTP.

244 Single nanorods exhibit a particle-dependent waiting time for tinting (from 100 ms to 10 s) due to Li

245 he rate of deceased organ donation or median waiting time for transplant in individual provinces.

246 Waiting time to transplantation was not significantly di

247 l universal superposition principle of time, waiting time, and temperature.

248 lised orthoses which can help reduce patient waiting time, improve patient compliance, reduce pain an

249 disease, donor age, cold ischemia time, and waiting time.

250 ne the factors associated with prolonged KPD waiting time.

251 have been studied extensively, persistence (waiting) time statistics of wind is far from well unders

252 The primary outcome was the median total wait-time from referral date to either SAVR or TAVR proc

253 Wait-time mortality was 2.5% (TAVR 5.2% and SAVR 1.05%),

254 status 1a/1b (70.4%; P < .001), and shortest wait times (P < .001).

255 Fewer flights and longer wait times can impact logistics as well as cold ischemia

256 ed clinicians to administer, leading to long wait times for at-risk children.

257 cement, there has been a trend of increasing wait times for both SAVR and TAVR.

258 Wait times for surgery are largely unexplored in the Uni

259 The mean and median wait times for the overall AVR cohort were 87 and 59 day

260 Factors independently associated with longer wait times included Medicaid insurance [odds ratio (OR)

261 Nevertheless, wait times were not long, implying that opportunities ma

262 These wait times were similar regardless of clinician type or

263 e, eligible patients are experiencing longer wait times when pursuing bariatric surgery.

264 Similarly, the majority of "wait times" did not change (85%); however, the majority

265 ver, the majority of significant changes in "wait times" for the four early season forage species ind

266 pring activity date and early season forage "wait times" were assessed using non-parametric regressio

267 early season forage species indicated that "wait times" were lessening where changes were detected.

268 d be determined with consideration of median wait times, availability of hepatitis C virus-positive o

269 ription was possible at the first visit, and wait times.

270 nformation provision, additional facilities, waiting times and out of pocket expenses.

271 of a gamma distribution, which derives from waiting times between Poisson events.

272 The behaviours of the molecular waiting times change with the changing of mechanical loa

273 (e) Have allergy clinic waiting times changed?

274 gs could facilitate new strategies to reduce waiting times for an HCV diagnosis and improve linkage t

275 es recommend fixed (though disease-specific) waiting times for end-of-epidemic declarations that cann

276 ften thought of as a slow process due to the waiting times for mutations that cause incompatibilities

277 ansplant rates and no differential effect on waiting times for R+ vs R- after the protocol was implem

278 dances for allergy clinic patients, although waiting times have increased.

279 of allergy-related hospital attendances and waiting times in 2013, 2014 and 2016 were assessed.

280 times overall whereas ACC inhibition renders waiting times insensitive to confidence-modulating attri

281 ress this demand-capacity mismatch, reducing waiting times of critically injured patients by factors

282 least 447 over 2 years, and greatly reduces waiting times of KPDP candidates.

283 Chemogenetic silencing of BLA shortens waiting times overall whereas ACC inhibition renders wai

284 However, disparities in waiting times persist for deceased donor kidney transpla

285 referral pathway in 2013-16 from the Cancer Waiting Times system from NHS Digital.

286 diatric candidates, although they did reduce waiting times.

287 The TAVR subcohort had longer wait-times (median 84 days) compared with the SAVR subco

288 s a statistically significant an increase in wait-times (P<0.001) for the overall AS cohort as well a

289 There is limited data on temporal trends in wait-times and access to care for patients with AS, irre

290 We sought to investigate the trends in wait-times for the treatment (either SAVR or TAVR) of AS

291 The number of patients waiting to receive a kidney transplant outstrips the sup

292 eflecting the intricacies of the human mind, waiting to succumb to the powerful, objective, and relia

293 f two (freely chosen) unmarked locations and wait, triggering the release of reward, which is then lo

294 The waiting type of motor impulsivity, defined as the diffic

295 eurologic prognosis, most physicians seem to wait until the postarrest timepoints proposed by current

296 COVID-19 lockdown, referrals via the 2-week-wait urgent pathway for suspected cancer in England, UK,

297 ine percent were treatment naive ("watch and wait"), while 61% had received >=1 CLL-directed therapy

298 , with ablative techniques, or with watchful waiting with active surveillance.

299 to 0.04 to 0.47 and 0.05 to 0.15 kidneys per wait-year for 250-nm and 500-nm homogeneous circles, res

300 circles ranged from 0.06 to 0.13 kidneys per wait-year, compared to 0.04 to 0.47 and 0.05 to 0.15 kid