ライフサイエンスコーパス: committee

1 djudicated by an independent clinical events committee.

2 ICH was adjudicated by a central committee.

3 xperiments were approved by the local ethics committee.

4 on the recommendation of the data monitoring committee.

5 nment, except the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee.

6 y an independent, blinded event adjudication committee.

7 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee.

8 udy drug, as determined by the Safety Review Committee.

9 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee.

10 ough a consensus radiology quality assurance committee.

11 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee.

12 is was approved by the local research ethics committee.

13 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee.

14 ved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

15 val of the institutional animal care and use committee.

16 c by an independent, blinded clinical events committee.

17 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee.

18 he institutional animal care and utilization committee.

19 nd clinical experience of the experts on the committee.

20 were adjudicated by an imaging adjudication committee.

21 grade was scored in consensus by a pathology committee.

22 l from the institutional animal care and use committee.

23 ds The study was approved by the animal care committee.

24 Washington Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

25 outcome was SCD as adjudicated by a blinded committee.

26 rotocol and adjudicated by a Clinical Events Committee.

27 ghly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Oversight Committee.

28 cussion with the independent data monitoring committee.

29 tients, as assessed by an independent review committee.

30 reatment was approved by the clinical ethics committee.

31 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee.

32 ved by the institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

33 re (HF) were adjudicated by a blinded events committee.

34 tive study was approved by the local ethical committee.

35 dy was approved by the local research ethics committee.

36 s This study was approved by the animal care committee.

37 % had a clinician on their graduate advisory committee.

38 djudicated by an independent clinical events committee.

39 ved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

40 s The study was approved by the local ethics committee.

41 nt study was approved by the regional ethics committee.

42 Approval was obtained from the local ethics committee.

43 ed fashion by an independent clinical events committee.

44 mmittee, Committee of Tellers, and Elections Committee.

45 rch Center Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

46 as were classified by a blinded adjudicating committee.

47 quired data was approved by the local ethics committee.

48 re approved by the institutional animal care committee.

49 safety and institutional animal care and use committee.

50 assessed by independent radiological review committee.

51 adverse events were adjudicated by separate committees.

52 publishers, from funding agencies to hiring committees.

53 ed by institutional animal and human studies committees.

54 approval from the institutional animal care committee, 60 male Sprague-Dawley rats were fed either a

55 rough the establishment of the Federal Joint Committee, a major payer-provider structure given the ta

56 the disparity, the Women in Transplantation Committee, a subcommittee of The Transplantation Society

57 m of complications reported to the ASRS ReST Committee across 6 months.

58 An independent clinical events committee adjudicated safety endpoints based on Valve Ac

59 Clinical events committee-adjudicated definite AST (occurring </=24 hour

60 lines Committee of the Professional Practice Committee, an ad hoc committee was formed in 2014 to ass

61 calculation recommended by the ICRP and MIRD Committee, an analysis based on propagation of uncertain

62 earch and Safety in Therapeutics (ASRS ReST) Committee, an independent task force formed to monitor d

63 nts were approved by the animal care and use committee and adhered to experimental animal care guidel

64 and written by its Health and Public Policy Committee and approved by the Board of Regents on 16 Feb

65 ritten by ACP's Medical Practice and Quality Committee and approved by the Board of Regents on 21 Jan

66 The clinical events committee and echocardiographic core laboratory methods

67 otocols approved by the local animal studies committee and institutional review board.

68 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee and performed from February 2014 to April 2015

69 view describes the development of the ad hoc committee and results from their review of several ASM b

70 tatement that was circulated to the steering committee and revised multiple times to achieve consensu

71 inical scenarios were developed by a writing committee and scored by the rating panel: 10 were identi

72 ved by the institutional animal care and use committee and the institutional review board.

73 ntrol study was approved by the local ethics committee and the research department of Nottingham Univ

74 electronic survey developed by the Steering Committee and the RSNA Department of Research.

75 was approved by the national research ethics committee and was performed with informed consent.

76 of the Newcastle and North Tyneside 2 ethics committee and written consent.

77 dverse events (SAEs) were reported to ethics committees and a central safety monitor.

78 ations for institutional animal care and use committees and institutional officials to ensure appropr

79 edures for institutional animal care and use committees and institutional officials.

80 g, establishing oversight and implementation committees and teams, training logisticians and health w

81 dy was approved by the local research ethics committee, and all participants gave written informed co

82 s The study was approved by the local Ethics Committee, and all patients or their parents gave writte

83 s The study was approved by the local ethics committee, and all subjects gave written informed consen

84 w board and the stem cell research oversight committee, and animal experiments were approved by the a

85 udy was approved by the institutional ethics committee, and informed consent was waived.

86 The study was approved by a research ethics committee, and participants gave written informed consen

87 d Operations Center, Diagnostics and Devices Committee, and SDMC.

88 membership of a radiopharmaceutical advisory committee, and the FDA should contract with them to do s

89 evaluation was approved by the local ethics committee, and the requirement to obtain informed consen

90 vivo study was approved by the local ethics committee, and written informed consent was obtained fro

91 researchers, regulatory authorities, ethics committees, and policymakers.

92 ctive study was approved by the local ethics committees, and written informed consent was obtained fr

93 Materials and Methods Institutional ethics committee approval and informed consent were obtained.

94 d between 2006 and 2016 with research ethics committee approval and written informed consent from eac

95 Institutional review board and local ethics committee approval and written informed consent were obt

96 Materials and Methods Local ethics committee approval was obtained at all sites for this pr

97 en informed consent and institutional ethics committee approval were obtained.

98 Methods This study had institutional ethics committee approval.

99 ials and Methods In this Animal Care and Use Committee approved study, 17 days after the injection of

100 The institutional ethics committee approved the study and waived informed consent

101 terials and Methods The institutional ethics committee approved the study and waived the requirement

102 igned consent, and the local research ethics committee approved the study.

103 The institutional animal care committee approved this study.

104 roval body, the Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee, approved the final endorsement.

105 thods This institutional animal care and use committee-approved study was performed in C57BL6 mice (n

106 ds In this Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee-approved study, healthy rats received 20 intra

107 ospectively included in this regional ethics committee-approved study.

108 A project task force, consisting of the committee as a whole, was approved to develop a new Tech

109 mary endpoint was blinded independent review committee assessed progression-free survival, based on a

110 An independent review committee assessed response, including progressive disea

111 The primary end point was independent review committee-assessed overall response rate (ORR) by 2007 I

112 The primary end point was independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS).

113 ession-free survival (per independent review committee assessment) and overall survival.

114 The committee assigns the recommendations a rating of A, B,

115 l from the institutional animal care and use committee, autologous liver endothelial cells were grown

116 Using the ACP grading system, the committee based these recommendations on a systematic re

117 The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on a systematic re

118 Using the ACP grading system, the committee based these recommendations on a systematic re

119 mendation of the independent data monitoring committee because of futility.

120 The committee believes that wide adoption of these formats a

121 ed protocols approved by six research ethics committees between 13 January 2000 and 25 November 2003.

122 An independent committee, blinded to treatment assignments, adjudicated

123 Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the MIRD Committee but without information concerning uncertainti

124 d more quality, surveillance, and prevention committees, but fewer 24/7 intensivists and poorer nurse

125 ica (IDSA) Standards and Practice Guidelines Committee collaborated with partner organizations to con

126 The committee collectively developed Population, Interventio

127 s of the APA Committee on Bylaws, Membership Committee, Committee of Tellers, and Elections Committee

128 The committee comprised 3 workgroups: Cancer Risk, Transplan

129 An update committee conducted a targeted systematic literature rev

130 The committee conducted an extensive search of the relevant

131 Methods A joint ASCO-CCO Update Committee conducted targeted systematic literature revie

132 ) what intake-response models can future DRI committees consider when using chronic disease endpoints

133 An independent Clinical Events Committee consisting of expert physicians who were blind

134 The CHIC steering committee-consisting of leadership from the four major c

135 presence of a woman on the speaker selection committee correlated with improved parity.

136 The data monitoring committee criterion for risk assessment (significant dif

137 primary endpoint was independent data review committee-determined overall response-ie, complete or pa

138 dards of Care, the ADA Professional Practice Committee did MEDLINE searches from 1 January 2016 to No

139 Although the Data Monitoring Committee did not identify safety issues, we terminated

140 Members of the committee discussed the evidence and provided recommenda

141 k and further deliberation, the ECDP writing committee down-graded recommendations regarding bile aci

142 ne (judged by the data and safety monitoring committee [DSMC]) grade 3-4 adverse events related to th

143 The committee followed the principles of the Grading of Reco

144 Complications reported to the ASRS ReST Committee following laser vitreolysis were analyzed by t

145 e protocol was approved by the French Ethics Committee for Animal Experiments.

146 This recommendation was made by the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices based on immunogeni

147 3) medical-home recognition by the National Committee for Quality Assurance, a designation that requ

148 ared for by providers practicing in National Committee for Quality Assurance-recognized patient-cente

149 ared for by providers practicing in National Committee for Quality Assurance-recognized patient-cente

150 Level III PCMH, as defined by the National Committee for Quality Assurance.

151 d a working group, later restructured as the Committee for Standardization of Thyroid Function Tests,

152 he marker molecules required by the European Committee for Standardization to be used to identify foo

153 d early after an independent data monitoring committee found a higher number of deaths in the rilotum

154 The committee found that it is reasonable to recommend that

155 This is not a conventional ethics committee, frequently giving rise to a board's bureaucra

156 hroughout the United States to the ASRS ReST Committee from the first report on September 19, 2016, t

157 ce Scheme of the Hong Kong University Grants Committee (grant number AoE/M-12/06).

158 For clarification, the writing committee has also included new information on diagnosti

159 The committee has established a conventional reference measu

160 Diseases Society of America Clinical Affairs Committee has long endeavored to quantify the value of I

161 Our committee has prioritized projects involving methicillin

162 The Nobel Committee has recognized this breakthrough by the awardi

163 The HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC) based at the European Bioinformatics In

164 icially approved guidelines developed by the committee, highlighting a few key recommendations regard

165 rmine what institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) processes were considered burdensome,

166 A joint planning and assessment committee identified gaps in the SRS for prioritization

167 arch, 2016), the independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) recommended closure of FOCUS4-D because

168 ) to receive the independent data monitoring committee (IDMC)-selected dose of trastuzumab emtansine

169 4% [39-46 mmol/mol] and International Expert Committee [IEC] HbA1c cutoff 6.0-6.4% [42-46 mmol/mol]),

170 onse confirmed by blinded independent review committee in all treated patients and by tumour PD-L1 ex

171 e survival assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population.

172 oquium chairs (and potentially on colloquium committees) increased the likelihood of women appearing

173 The Green Light Committee initiative supported programmatic management o

174 demic accomplishments, previous organization/committee involvement, motivation/insight, and overall w

175 sessed by an independent radiological review committee (IRRC).

176 The committee is not investigating the standardization of th

177 The purpose of this committee is therefore to advance reflection on the bioe

178 The mission of the Gram-Negative Committee is to advance our knowledge of these challengi

179 akers, assembled by conference organizers or committees, is key to achieving these goals.

180 The Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC-8) recommended treating systolic blood pr

181 m these important analyses, the ECDP writing committee judged that it would be desirable to provide a

182 The ECDP writing committee judged that these new data did not warrant cha

183 s may have immediate relevance for guideline committees, laboratory leadership, clinicians, and patie

184 The work of this committee led to key findings and recommendations for re

185 ich were adjudicated by an oncology endpoint committee masked to drug or dose allocation.

186 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment.

187 and Drug Administration's Pediatric Advisory Committee meeting are also reviewed.

188 Drug Administration has convened 2 Advisory Committee meetings and the product labels for Optison an

189 the Canadian and US government DRI steering committees met from November 2014 to April 2016 to ident

190 d from the institutional animal care and use committee, MR imaging guidewires were evaluated for stan

191 mmissions (RCCs), and National Certification Committees (NCCs) provide a framework of independent bod

192 oved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee North West-Lancaster (reference number 11/NW/0

193 , which the Ophthalmic Technology Assessment Committee Oculoplastics and Orbit Panel reviewed for rel

194 analyses done by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee of all randomised trials at MD Anderson Cancer

195 on of this study was approved by the Ethical Committee of Institute for Research in Maternal and Chil

196 It was prepared by an invited committee of international experts and represents an abb

197 Institute of Medicine and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors released guidance o

198 gy (ACR), the system has been developed by a committee of radiologists, hepatologists, pathologists,

199 A Committee on Bylaws, Membership Committee, Committee of Tellers, and Elections Committee.

200 were reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee of the ADA Board of Directors, which includes

201 were reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee of the ADA Board of Directors, which includes

202 vened through the Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & I

203 The Cardiovascular Disease in Women Committee of the American College of Cardiology, in conj

204 The Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Associatio

205 The Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Associatio

206 The Cancer Prevention Committee of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (

207 The mission of the Gram-Positive Committee of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Gro

208 It was produced by the Standards of Care Committee of the British Society of Allergy and Clinical

209 A Committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Enginee

210 ased Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines Committee of the Professional Practice Committee, an ad

211 omputational phantoms developed by the RADAR committee of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecul

212 etracted at the request of the Investigation Committee of the University of Colorado, Denver, USA, an

213 evaluation was approved by the local ethics committee of the University of Heidelberg (ethics approv

214 isy labels, where the cost is estimated by a committee of weak classifiers that consider both curated

215 peaker-Elect and the chairpersons of the APA Committee on Bylaws, Membership Committee, Committee of

216 greater concordance than the American Joint Committee on Cancer (8th edition) system.

217 for age, sex, and 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage.

218 date the proposed 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) system for T and N staging of

219 Controversy exists around the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system for medull

220 4 cm) to IIIA (defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer 6th edition) NSCLC.

221 sed with early-stage disease (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage 0, I, or II), and 48 (5

222 sion or stage IV according to American Joint Committee on Cancer [sixth edition] criteria) were prere

223 and large tumor size (T3-4 by American Joint Committee on Cancer classification).

224 ging system incorporating the American Joint Committee on Cancer clinical stage (CS), final pathologi

225 th the staging systems of the American Joint Committee on Cancer sixth (0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.29) and

226 nced stage patients with HCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III/IV) who received sorafenib

227 with advanced, unresectable, American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIIC or stage IV NRAS-mutant m

228 no additional therapy for an American Joint Committee on Cancer stage T3a N0 M0 tumor that was 2.7 m

229 ed in these guidelines is the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edition.

230 y gene expression profile and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging.

231 International Cancer Control/American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM classification.

232 The American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging showed limited prognosti

233 According to the American Joint Committee on Cancer, eighth edition, staging criteria fo

234 The current American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Contr

235 The current American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Contr

236 , and the study protocol was approved by the committee on human research.

237 e was unchanged from 2015-2016, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices made an interim reco

238 onjugate vaccine in accordance with Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations shou

239 Also in 2014-2015, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended preferen

240 In 2006, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended that ado

241 US medical schools accredited by the Liason Committee on Medical Education.

242 The Foundation will include a committee on moral philosophy that will accompany and su

243 and the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Trea

244 and the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Trea

245 The American Thoracic Society committee on Proficiency Standards for Pulmonary Functio

246 are published when the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation completes a literature review

247 tric Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation evidence review.

248 The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a near-continuo

249 cience reviewed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation in the previous year.

250 e deliberations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force members are provid

251 It aligns with the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation's continuous evidence review

252 ng glycemic status (as defined by the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabete

253 ohort study was approved by a medical ethics committee overseen by the national government, and all p

254 The 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee panel recommended a therapeutic target of syst

255 As assessed by independent review committee, patients with higher DI experienced longer me

256 Under the oversight of the Federal Joint Committee, payer and provider associations have ensured

257 o the allergic patients, the EAACI Specialty Committee proposes the minimal requirements for training

258 pneumonia (confirmed by the endpoint review committee), pulmonary or extrapulmonary tuberculosis, or

259 The committee rated the recommendations as A, B, or C, depen

260 The committee rates the recommendations as A, B, or C, depen

261 After initial screening, the committee read 198 articles in full and analyzed 123 art

262 point, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and t

263 The Update Committee recommends that the current standard of care f

264 The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there

265 ers with an overreader for disagreements and committee review for remaining discrepancies.

266 he basis of patient history, clinical events committee review of medical records, or baseline HbA1c o

267 a data access request, wait for Data Access Committee review, download each data set and locally exa

268 xempt from institutional animal care and use committee review.

269 an 26, 2016, the independent data monitoring committee reviewed the data at the planned interim analy

270 Results The Update Committee reviewed three phase III noninferiority trials

271 The final report of the committee's study and deliberations was released on Marc

272 ies.This article presents an overview of the committee's study and resulting recommendations, which c

273 The elements presented for committee scrutiny were adapted from previous case repor

274 Members of the radiopharmaceutical advisory committee should decide on the data to be presented by t

275 ndependent Immunization and Vaccine Advisory Committees (SIVAC) Initiative project, provides assistan

276 A Clinical Affairs Committee-sponsored study of ID physicians' positive imp

277 red drug resistance shown by the Green Light Committee-supported programmatic management of drug-resi

278 a (RSNA) Patient-Centered Radiology Steering Committee survey were to (a) assess RSNA members' genera

279 erican Society of Nephrology (ASN) Workforce Committee that seeks to connect medical and graduate stu

280 It is the hope of this committee that this new information will assist both cli

281 er effort led by the ASCO Health Disparities Committee, the purpose of the plan is to guide the forma

282 aft was discussed and approved by the entire committee, then the document was circulated among all me

283 ety (ATS) created a multidisciplinary ad hoc committee to develop a research statement on implementat

284 017 Standards, the ADA Professional Practice Committee updated previous MEDLINE searches performed fr

285 The committee used an iterative consensus process to define

286 n 2014 to assess guidelines published by the committee using an assessment tool, Appraisal of Guideli

287 val, assessed by a masked independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tu

288 and formally adjudicated by a blinded events committee using standardized protocols.

289 objective response by the independent review committee was 48% (95% CI 36-60).

290 e Professional Practice Committee, an ad hoc committee was formed in 2014 to assess guidelines publis

291 An ad hoc project steering committee was formed, to include individuals with expert

292 fter approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee was obtained, we recruited potential recipient

293 l (as assessed by blinded independent review committee) was 16.6 months (95% CI 12.6-27.2) in the cer

294 results of a survey of the project steering committee, were discussed at an in-person meeting.

295 The writing committee, which reflects Global Cardiovascular Disease

296 d, the case report form was presented to the committee, who agreed that it was "appropriate and usefu

297 The ASRS ReST Committee will continue to monitor device-related and dr

298 Thoracic Society convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in tobacco dependence treatment

299 ival assessed by a masked independent review committee with the primary hypothesis that ibrutinib com

300 oved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee; written informed consent was obtained from al