戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。

今後説明を表示しない

[OK]

コーパス検索結果 (1語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 asured in all 17 segments and a normal range was calculated for each.
2                                Hazard ratios were calculated for each 1-unit increase in log1.5(bioma
3  The average annual incidence of ALS and PDC was calculated for each 5-year period from 1940 to 1999,
4 pdated, and incidences of early and late AMD were calculated for each 5-year interval.
5 ion, tube feeding, and replacement infusions were calculated for each 6-hr interval.
6 s specimens, and volume and sphericity index were calculated for each ablation.
7 s, and APD60 and the diastolic interval (DI) were calculated for each activation cycle throughout eac
8  (per 1000 person-years of follow-up [PYFU]) were calculated for each ADI within different CD4 strata
9  using whole-hospital cost to charge ratios, were calculated for each admission.
10 uppression in the presence of a plant matrix was calculated for each analyte.
11 er of 0.9 and an alpha of 0.05, 180 patients were calculated for each arm.
12     Receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for each assay to determine optimal cuto
13              Time to onset of symptom relief was calculated for each attack.
14          Moreover, cooperative free energies were calculated for each binding step in both the closed
15         The positive predictive value of DSE was calculated for each BP group.
16                    Suicide rates per 100 000 were calculated for each branch.
17 ooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each BRM.
18 d the mean percentage of expiratory collapse was calculated for each bronchus.
19                 Preoperatively 2 risk scores were calculated for each case using the Muhtaseb and Buc
20 ens contact and angle open distance (AOD500) were calculated for each case.
21              Statistical significance values are calculated for each category.
22                 Mean PSV, VICA/VCCA, and SDs were calculated for each category.
23              Person-time and incidence rates were calculated for each category.
24 btained and the proportional mortality ratio was calculated for each cause of death.
25 stolic velocities (EDVs) and velocity ratios were calculated for each CCA measurement.
26  rates within 30 days of the index operation were calculated for each center.
27 ight-for-stature and BMI-for-age percentiles were calculated for each child.
28                             Mayo risk scores were calculated for each clinic attendance and expected
29 ificity (% of true-negative throat cultures) were calculated for each clinical feature.
30                   Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for each cohort and in a combined analys
31 ric, physiochemical and topologic properties are calculated for each complex, its domains, interfaces
32 sted mortality rates (RAMRs) after discharge were calculated for each condition in each month at each
33 s, and effective resistance through the TCPC were calculated for each condition.
34                  Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each condition.
35 re identified, and the case to control ratio was calculated for each consensus region.
36 d ratio (PLR) of malignancy and kappa values were calculated for each criterion.
37                        Postzygotic isolation was calculated for each cross as the product of these fi
38 opulation-specific cutoffs for childhood BMI were calculated for each CVD risk factor.
39 esion MTR : healthy nerve MTR (lesion ratio) was calculated for each dataset.
40 ve summary receiver-operating characteristic was calculated for each day and each biomarker, using a
41       A cumulative respiratory symptom score was calculated for each day of measurement.
42 orresponding sensitivities and specificities were calculated for each definition.
43                                  Sensitivity was calculated for each detection method.
44 ihood ratios, with 95% confidence intervals, were calculated for each diagnostic criteria.
45 edian and 90th percentile ED lengths of stay were calculated for each disposition and admission/disch
46                                Hazard ratios were calculated for each doubling of biomarker concentra
47     The average infant-maternal plasma ratio was calculated for each drug, and correlations of infant
48      MIC frequency, mode, and geometric mean were calculated for each drug.
49 ndex (HHI), a measure of market competition, was calculated for each DSA from 2003 to 2012.
50                        Mean choroidal volume was calculated for each Early Treatment Diabetic Retinop
51                   For macular scans, mean CT was calculated for each Early Treatment Diabetic Retinop
52     The number of collaterals per neuron can be calculated for each environment and the relative role
53          Standardised mortality ratios (SMR) were calculated for each epilepsy type, 10-year age band
54  attenuation, values of the Cramer-Rao bound were calculated for each estimation task as a function o
55             The dose homogeneity index (DHI) was calculated for each evaluable implant and was examin
56                     Kaplan-Meier event rates were calculated for each event and the composite outcome
57                 Hepatic fECS and MMCM uptake were calculated for each examination and correlated with
58 turbulence timing (TT), and turbulence onset were calculated for each extrastimulus, and the linear r
59           The mean ocular perfusion pressure was calculated for each eye at each of the 8 time points
60                         The rate of RGC loss was calculated for each eye using linear regression.
61               The rate of change of MD (MDR) was calculated for each eye.
62                                The NHT score was calculated for each eye.
63 viations of PED area and volume measurements were calculated for each eye.
64  center, a measure of hemodialysis adequacy, was calculated for each facility, using measurements mad
65 y analyses were conducted, Cronbach's alphas were calculated for each factor, and construct validity
66 vity, and the total number of teaching hours was calculated for each faculty member.
67 ncies, the expected levels of heterozygosity were calculated for each family.
68  average PFV (APFV) across orthogonal planes was calculated for each fetus, and the relationship betw
69  normalized dose (in milligrays per 100 mAs) was calculated for each fetus.
70                                         PPVs were calculated for each finding and were stratified acc
71       The radioactivity level in each region was calculated for each frame of a subject's PET scan.
72                Normalized expression indices were calculated for each gene and intergenic region (IG)
73                                  Odds ratios were calculated for each genotype separately and for pot
74             The following functional indices were calculated for each gland: partitioned percentage (
75    The ratio of SUV-G to SUV-M (SUV-G/SUV-M) was calculated for each graft.
76                                   R0 and SIG were calculated for each grid cell in Canada south of 60
77           Recurrence and stoma free survival was calculated for each group and independent risk facto
78             The rate of remission at week 12 was calculated for each group of patients without remiss
79                        Implant survival rate was calculated for each group, and potential risk was re
80 DS brain, the cholesterol/phospholipid ratio was calculated for each group.
81                      The rate of dissections was calculated for each group.
82 zation and major or minor bleeding at 7 days were calculated for each group and compared.
83 negative, appendectomy and perforation rates were calculated for each group for preoperative evaluati
84                 Indices of fractal dimension were calculated for each group of sea lions using a unit
85 s in PD, CAL and REC from baseline to 1 year were calculated for each group.
86                       Lifetime medical costs were calculated for each group.
87 antel-Haenszel statistic for survival curves were calculated for each group.
88 ood ratios for positive and negative results were calculated for each group; 95% confidence intervals
89         Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated for each gynecologic cancer site and for
90               From these structures, A and B were calculated for each H[bond]C[bond]C[bond]H fragment
91        The annual-caseload of pancreatectomy was calculated for each hospital facility.
92                           Two summary scores were calculated for each HRQoL scale: the average score
93                  The dose-area product (DAP) was calculated for each image and compared.
94 V), per-patient accuracy, and per-lesion PPV were calculated for each image set.
95 global measure such as Shannon's entropy can be calculated for each immunosignature.
96 inety-five percent confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each incidence rate, including age-,
97 ects model, relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs were calculated for each increment of 10 mug/m(3) in pol
98 nd the average intimal-to-medial (I/M) ratio was calculated for each incubation interval.
99 number of risk alleles an individual carries was calculated for each individual in the prediction set
100                       AM detection threshold was calculated for each individual unit as a function of
101                  Clinical risk factor burden was calculated for each individual using a validated ris
102 l genotype score' (for the 23 polymorphisms) was calculated for each individual within a hypothetical
103 ctions, the 3-year cumulative risks of CIN3+ were calculated for each individual high-risk HPV type.
104 urve areas, sensitivities, and specificities were calculated for each instrument separately for each
105 iation of the logarithm of expression ratios are calculated for each interval using the nearest neigh
106                         Percentage retention was calculated for each interval.
107         Regional cerebral perfusion pressure was calculated for each intraparenchymal pressure measur
108               A methyl deviation index (MDI) was calculated for each lesion relative to terminal duct
109             The magnetization transfer ratio was calculated for each lesion.
110 ADCs) from DW imaging (b = 0, 600 sec/mm(2)) were calculated for each lesion and were compared betwee
111 nal enhancement ratio (a measure of washout) were calculated for each lesion.
112 nhancement, and the signal enhancement ratio were calculated for each lesion.
113 ers pertinent to the experimental conditions was calculated for each line.
114 sode as well as average changes in thickness were calculated for each macular field for each eye.
115                           Resulting D scores were calculated for each management decision.
116 by the mean left atrial blood pool intensity was calculated for each mapping site.
117                        The HEM/liv quotients were calculated for each mass.
118     Sensitivity and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each modality.
119 r the receiver operator characteristic curve was calculated for each model.
120 actual and predicted binocular sensitivities were calculated for each model.
121 , area under the curve (AUC), and thresholds were calculated for each model.
122 e (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated for each MR imaging sign.
123  negative predictive values for PE detection were calculated for each MR technique on a per-embolus b
124 , the ratio of DeltaQ( not equal)/DeltaQ can be calculated for each mutant.
125 atio of adducted to total BuChE nonapeptides was calculated for each nerve agent-exposed serum sample
126           Two-hundred classical trajectories are calculated for each of the milestones to collect loc
127           These parameters of water sorption are calculated for each of the three regions of water bi
128                         Mathematical moments are calculated for each of these spectra to create a mul
129 act with neighboring protein atoms, and D(x) is calculated for each of the points in a coarse-grained
130 receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) was calculated for each of five lesion classification ta
131                          The mean blood flow was calculated for each of four 5-mm sections that cover
132                          Median waiting time was calculated for each of the 58 donor service areas (D
133                 The frequency of each allele was calculated for each of the age-at-onset, onset type,
134            The vibrational density of states was calculated for each of the esterases.
135 et of vicinal and allylic coupling constants was calculated for each of the four diastereomers whose
136                                  Sensitivity was calculated for each of the variables.
137            The critical values of the cutoff were calculated for each of 11 popular power-type potent
138 the chi-square, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for each of 240 possible definitions of
139                        Area and ILI measures were calculated for each of 5 patients for three or more
140 sure to the main groups of asthma medication were calculated for each of the 10 signal anomalies comp
141                          Retinal thicknesses were calculated for each of the 9 Early Treatment Diabet
142       The number and rate of deaths by cause were calculated for each of the component trials and the
143                Reactivity ratios, r1 and r2, were calculated for each of the copolymer systems, givin
144                  Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each of the readers, and the means w
145 ccessive transverse slices along the rostrum were calculated for each of the species.
146 ckness (at the Anterior Sub-arachnoid space) were calculated for each ONH.
147                                   ADC values were calculated for each organ on each sequence using an
148 atios, according to HCC surveillance status, were calculated for each outcome using the DerSimonian a
149 arson product moment correlation coefficient was calculated for each pair of scoring tools.
150            Spectra and correlation functions were calculated for each pair of records.
151  the receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated for each parameter on the basis of its u
152         The number of BMI-increasing alleles was calculated for each participant.
153          A score for predicted 25(OH)D level was calculated for each participant.
154                             Both diet scores were calculated for each participant and categorized int
155                     The aMed and DASH scores were calculated for each participant by using dietary in
156                  Language laterality indexes were calculated for each participant.
157 orrected visual acuity of 6/60 or worse, and was calculated for each participating hospital with resu
158                        Final standard curves were calculated for each pathogen by plotting the thresh
159 fusion pressure within limits of reactivity) was calculated for each patient and compared across dich
160                The nuclear morphometry score was calculated for each patient as follows: MV(f) = (0.0
161         A 12-point arrhythmia severity score was calculated for each patient at baseline and on follo
162                                A RIFLE score was calculated for each patient based on percent change
163                      The International Index was calculated for each patient based on stage, lactate
164                 Daily anticholinergic burden was calculated for each patient based on the sum of the
165 eding risk between prasugrel and clopidogrel was calculated for each patient to identify the proporti
166                       A final combined ratio was calculated for each patient, and posttrauma leukotri
167                              A symptom score was calculated for each patient.
168 The overall percentage change in enhancement was calculated for each patient.
169 s measured and the mortality predictor score was calculated for each patient.
170                 The amount of residual fluid was calculated for each patient.
171  and at weeks 4, 8, and 12, and a mean value was calculated for each patient.
172                                          Css was calculated for each patient; if it differed by more
173 d attenuation) and volumetric calcium scores were calculated for each patient and lesion.
174 l ERG response amplitudes and implicit times were calculated for each patient and presented as differ
175 ajor cardiovascular events by statin therapy were calculated for each patient by subtracting the esti
176 tios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each patient cohort.
177 e (PSMA-TV) and total lesion PSMA (TL-PSMA), were calculated for each patient using a 3-dimensional s
178 ed mean glucose and mean glucocorticoid dose were calculated for each patient using all values collec
179 nal (18)F-FDG uptake and (11)C-PIB retention were calculated for each patient, with cerebellar gray m
180 e predicted prestage 1 and 2 mortality risks were calculated for each patient.
181 zed binocular 24-2 and 10-2 VF sensitivities were calculated for each patient.
182 regulation over the entire monitoring period were calculated for each patient.
183      TTR and log-transformed INR variability were calculated for each patient.
184                        Three dynamic indices were calculated for each patient: the global index of my
185                    A 95% prediction interval was calculated for each peak pressure, and the upper lim
186 e score (scope score), a psychometric scale, was calculated for each physician and ranged from 0 to 3
187  oxy-hemoglobin, deoxy-hemoglobin, and water were calculated for each pixel of a spectral image stack
188               The half-life of Ins in PtdIns was calculated for each point on the linear incorporatio
189 number average association constant (K(n)()) were calculated for each polymer in a series, using equa
190  factors for methanol and ethanol adsorption were calculated for each pressure increment at which the
191 ences for emergent versus elective admission were calculated for each procedure.
192                      Mean group event scores were calculated for each product.
193                            Group differences were calculated for each protocol and meta-analyzed.
194                          Prescription totals were calculated for each provider specialty.
195                        Validation parameters were calculated for each question, and receiver operatin
196 confidence intervals (Cls), and Ps for trend were calculated for each quintile of plasma antioxidant
197 and population-attributable risk percentages were calculated for each racial/ethnic group.
198 nal change realized at the transition state) were calculated for each reaction series as the slope of
199 predictive value for characterization of PDP was calculated for each reader with 95% confidence inter
200 ted, and the area under the ROC curve (A(z)) was calculated for each reader.
201  the receiver operating characteristic curve was calculated for each reader.
202                     Amplitudes and latencies were calculated for each recording session.
203 lence of near and distance visual impairment was calculated for each region.
204 zed incidence rates for 1990-2006 (combined) were calculated for each region.
205 ios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each risk factor.
206 e risk groups, and success rates at 6 months were calculated for each risk group either without or wi
207  and c-statistics (to assess discrimination) were calculated for each risk scheme.
208  variation (CV), and test-retest SD (TRT SD) were calculated for each RNFL and ONH parameter.
209 at dose (THD) from activated tumor bioprobes was calculated for each Rx group using (111)In-bioprobe
210                    The autocorrelation score was calculated for each sample and the proportion of sam
211                         The cook value index was calculated for each sample to evaluate the entity of
212  were grouped, and the degree of duplication was calculated for each sample.
213 of allele loss, fractional allele loss (FAL) was calculated for each sample.
214 osphorylation of 14C- and 18F-2-deoxyglucose was calculated for each sample.
215 ratios (LR) and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) were calculated for each scale as a test for HAD or MND.
216 one-week period and interjudge reliabilities were calculated for each scale; reliabilities of the two
217                   The PERSI reference region was calculated for each scan by fitting a bimodal gaussi
218  therapy per 1000 patient-days (DOT/1000PD), were calculated for each SCH and compared with rates in
219   MBF and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) were calculated for each segment, and mean values in eac
220 (Pearson correlation coefficient [r] values) were calculated for each sequence.
221 -fit ellipse) and nearest neighbor distances were calculated for each session.
222                                         C-PP was calculated for each sex by a multiple regression ana
223 s (rSMRs), and proportional mortality ratios were calculated for each sex and ethnic group relative t
224 velocity after contrast agent administration was calculated for each site interrogated.
225 ivation between active and passive movements were calculated for each somatotopic location.
226             Pesticide concentration profiles were calculated for each source and mountain site by nor
227 e, mineral mass, and modified Agatston score were calculated for each specimen by using a number of s
228  spin label and 30 to 60 amide protons could be calculated for each spin-labeled protein.
229  including both nominal and uncertainty data is calculated for each stage of the algae-derived fuel l
230                       Duration and intensity were calculated for each statin type on the basis of day
231 f central to peripheral responses (Q values) was calculated for each stimulus configuration.
232                                    Hedges' g was calculated for each study and volume changes from ba
233                                    Hedges' g was calculated for each study, and the overall weighted
234                    Tube current-time product was calculated for each study.
235 arks/total number of items assessed) x 100%] was calculated for each study.
236 pe- and serogroup-specific odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for each study and as a pooled estimate,
237              Sensitivities and specificities were calculated for each study and pooled estimates were
238 average ambient PM2.5 and NOx concentrations were calculated for each study participant's home addres
239 MMSE score differences between waves 2 and 3 were calculated for each study participant.
240 estimates of type 1 diabetes by maternal age were calculated for each study, before and after adjustm
241  diabetes by category of interbirth interval were calculated for each study.
242 landmarks, and eight clinical parameters had been calculated for each subject.
243                A QT variability index (QTVI) was calculated for each subject as the logarithm of the
244                            The slope of FEV1 was calculated for each subject using simple linear regr
245 equal to standard deviation divided by mean) was calculated for each subject, session, and anatomic l
246                        A familial risk score was calculated for each subject.
247 us risk groups, and the probability of a PTD was calculated for each subject.
248 r correlation with the left precentral gyrus was calculated for each subject.
249 malized images and the percentage ROI active was calculated for each subject.
250 t radiographs, and ratios of MB/LA and TR/LA were calculated for each subject and compared with FEF25
251  and ONFlow for these five measurement sites were calculated for each subject and defined as ONVel5,
252    Full mouth median GCF PGE2 concentrations were calculated for each subject at days 0, 14, 28, and
253               FMZ transport and binding maps were calculated for each subject by using a physiologica
254 liability in street crossing decision-making were calculated for each subject under each sensory cond
255 M-EE) based on the four calibration sessions were calculated for each subject.
256 m questions about ocular surface discomfort) were calculated for each subject.
257   Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for each subject/analyte combination.
258 fter American Board of Surgery certification were calculated for each surgeon for each case.
259 ncremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each surveillance strategy.
260                    Correlations in liability were calculated for each syndrome in the monozygotic and
261                       Incidence of HZ events was calculated for each systemic antipsoriatic medicatio
262 urves were obtained, and limits of detection were calculated for each target in the buffer and clinic
263 ty, and diagnostic accuracy for MI detection were calculated for each technique and clinical conditio
264             The total direct cost of testing was calculated for each test type.
265 atistics, mean differences, and effect sizes were calculated for each test component.
266                                      Charges were calculated for each test.
267 Geometric means and distribution percentiles were calculated for each TFA and their sum by age, sex,
268                          A median rate ratio was calculated for each therapy, which describes the lik
269 attributable risk of DM as a CVD risk factor was calculated for each time period.
270 ted summary score for each functional domain was calculated for each time period.
271                  Target-to-background ratios were calculated for each time point.
272 air step, voxel-by-voxel rate of change maps were calculated for each tissue class (grey matter, whit
273 anisotropy (FA), an index of microstructure, was calculated for each tract.
274              Standardized mean change scores were calculated for each treatment arm, plotted against
275  fees) and mean postoperative length of stay were calculated for each treatment group.
276            ORs for the 4 clinical end points were calculated for each trial.
277 er coefficient, and fractional plasma volume were calculated for each tumor and each CM by means of a
278 er the background somatic mutation frequency were calculated for each tumor type by racial ethnicity.
279             Dose distributions (percentiles) were calculated for each type of procedure in the RAD-IR
280 surgery by ophthalmologists and optometrists were calculated for each United States state.
281 ls, the estimated probability of observation was calculated for each urologist within each risk strat
282 lue, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated for each US sign in the diagnosis of ful
283  and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each US variable.
284    The net yield (revenue minus expenditure) was calculated for each vaccine.
285                  Confidence intervals of 95% were calculated for each value with the standard equatio
286 ular modeling, and the pK(a) value for Cys22 was calculated for each variant.
287        Distance-, fuel- and work-based PNEFs were calculated for each vehicle.
288    Correlation coefficients between measures were calculated for each visit.
289                     If an optimal drift time is calculated for each voltage and scanned simultaneousl
290    For validation, the upper limit of normal was calculated for each volunteer and compared with the
291 ding potential (a measure of amyloid burden) was calculated for each voxel using the Logan graphical
292 d and the magnetization transfer ratio (MTR) was calculated for each voxel within the corpus callosum
293 m plutonium, americium, and uranium isotopes were calculated for each worker with an internal dosimet
294               The incidence rate ratio (IRR) was calculated for each year in the study period; the pr
295                   Cumulative incidence rates were calculated for each year by dividing the number of
296                                Rates of MRSA were calculated for each year by using all isolates and
297 nds in the number of habitus-limited reports were calculated for each year, and linear regression ana
298  infection burden and patient health profile were calculated for each year, and linear regression was
299 tumor resection and median relative survival were calculated for each year.
300          Nationwide estimates of utilisation were calculated for each year.

WebLSDに未収録の専門用語(用法)は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。
 
Page Top