1 orted by small-angle x-ray scattering and by
comparison of observed infrared absorption spectra with
2 Side by side
comparison of the developed microfluidic biosensor with
3 Comparison of the transmembrane helix architecture with
4 Comparison of solid-state sodium cells with 1) solid ele
5 is ongoing, recently published intrapatient
comparisons of (18)F-fluciclovine with (
11)C-choline rep
6 Extensive
comparisons of Discriminant-Cut with 13 existing methods
7 e for the ptau:ttau ratio was 0.916, and the
comparison of ALS with 4-repeat tauopathy showed 92.0% s
8 city and optical activity is investigated in
comparisons of heterocycles with 4n + 2 and 4n pi-electr
9 A
comparison of Altona with a laboratory-developed BKV NAA
10 Cross-
comparison of AmbO5 with a previously characterized alip
11 We find from
comparison of EGFP molecular flow with a molecule that h
12 filing of Ccn6(fl/fl) mammary carcinomas and
comparison of orthologous genes with a human metaplastic
13 Comparison of outcomes in patients with a relapsing vs n
14 Of note, a
comparison of the CCHD/LD1 complex with a previously sol
15 Comparison of the current structure with a previous stru
16 Here, we describe a structural
comparison of the isolated RH domain with a domain swapp
17 Comparison of the measurements with a theoretical model
18 Comparison of the palladacycles with a conventional pall
19 s of apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), followed by
comparisons of cognitive function, with a particular foc
20 ed ejection fraction (EF) in the Prospective
Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
21 In the Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
22 In the PARADIGM-HF trial (Prospective
Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
23 We investigated these in the Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
24 The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
25 ost patients in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
26 The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective
comparison of ARNi with ACEi to Determine Impact on Glob
27 zed patients in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective
comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
28 s randomized in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
29 in either the PARADIGM-HF trial (Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Glob
30 A
comparison of tumors with acquired resistance to HDM201
31 Head-to-head
comparisons of conventional influenza vaccines with aden
32 Our subsequent
comparison of aging-related genes with age-related disea
33 RESOLUTE all-comers (Randomized
Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everol
34 ark, Illinois) in the RESOLUTE (A Randomized
Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everol
35 The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With an ACE-Inhibitor to Determine Im
36 Moreover,
comparison of CCM and NCM with an antibody array for 507
37 A structural
comparison of holo-ScNsrR with an apo-IscR-DNA complex s
38 In this framework, the
comparison of the results with an independent measuremen
39 A structural
comparison of the yeast CNC with an electron microscopy
40 On the basis of
comparison of this MDFF model with an earlier-derived cr
41 We show that
comparison of transcriptome profiles correlates with ana
42 Comparison of days with and without particle formation e
43 Comparison of gnotobiotic Rag1-/- mice with and without
44 h a microbial symbiont requires experimental
comparison of hosts with and without symbionts.
45 fects were clinically insignificant based on
comparisons of models with and without the effects, resu
46 In
comparisons of persons with and without cataract, person
47 tures in neurological conditions that allows
comparison of human gait with animal models would be of
48 a from randomization groups 1 and 2, and the
comparison of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet the
49 Structural
comparison of the bithionol complex with apo-sAC and oth
50 propeptide were measured in the Prospective
Comparison of ARNI With ARB on Management of Heart Failu
51 Comparisons of the North Indian record with both Antarct
52 Adjusted
comparisons of patients with BRONJ versus controls used
53 al tests, both in model selection and in the
comparison of results with Burke et al.
54 The structural
comparison of AsCpf1 with Cas9, a type II CRISPR-Cas nuc
55 Comparison of AQY(330) with CDOM spectral signatures sug
56 Live-dead staining and
comparisons of Fe-EC with chemical coagulation controls
57 Structural
comparisons of HDAC6-inhibitor complexes with class I HD
58 our knowledge the first large-scale genomic
comparison of SBA with colorectal cancer and gastric car
59 8442 patients randomized in the Prospective
Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor
60 Dose, route, duration, and
comparison of pharmacological strategies are reviewed, w
61 veloped methodology was used, relying on the
comparison of removal efficiency predictions (obtained w
62 Comparison of the redox array with conventional proteomi
63 The
comparison of trials with correct (Hits) versus incorrec
64 Comparison of control and intervention clusters with cov
65 Comparison of the experimental results with crystal-fiel
66 Comparison of platelet eQTLs with data from the Genotype
67 Comparison of simulations with data from H3N2 and H1N1 v
68 Comparison of the Hadza data set with data collected fro
69 Finally, a
comparison of the present results with data obtained wit
70 Subsequent
comparisons of data from 2003-2004 with data through 201
71 Interestingly, a head-to-head
comparison of mice with deletion of Adora2b in the myelo
72 absolute configuration has been assigned by
comparison of the experimental ECD spectra with DFT and
73 Comparison of PO diets with diets rich in stearic acid,
74 Comparison of PO-rich diets with diets rich in trans fat
75 nt affects the fusion mechanism as well as a
comparison of fusion behavior across viruses with differ
76 The super-SILAC approach allows
comparison of binding to multiple peptides with differen
77 We conclude that
comparison of fluorescence on materials with different n
78 are active and colour vision derives from a
comparison of signals in cones with different visual pig
79 Moreover,
comparisons of the reactivities with different recombina
80 ears) were recruited into the TOMMY trial (A
Comparison of Tomosynthesis with Digital Mammography in
81 Comparisons of gene essentiality with drug sensitivity d
82 The accuracy of the model is evaluated by a
comparison of measured voltage changes associated with e
83 A comprehensive
comparison of Chimira with each of these tools is provid
84 Comparison of these structures with each other, as well
85 d graft biopsy (index biopsy, IBx), allowing
comparison of risk of DCGF associated with early events
86 A
comparison of the interaction network with elastase comp
87 A
comparison of this work with emission rates from differe
88 e the first time to our knowledge, real-data
comparison of contemporary fisheries models with equival
89 Comparison of PDTX with ex vivo tumor cultures and arsen
90 A
comparison of the generated LCI with existing data revea
91 Comparisons of the model with existing methods indicate
92 Comparison of the theory with experiments is excellent f
93 Comparison of synaptic results with fast glutamate appli
94 Comparison of the Indian record with faunal records from
95 Comparison of purely topological characteristics with fl
96 The
comparison of settled dust with floor dust revealed no s
97 Comparison of SPRi with flow cytometry showed similar Ep
98 Comparison of fundus photographs with fluorescein angiog
99 By
comparison of the spectra with Franck-Condon simulations
100 A
comparison of F-actin with G-actin reveals the conformat
101 e identification of twenty-six components by
comparison of their mass spectra with GC-MS library data
102 bsets of pangenomes are selected, as well as
comparisons of individual genomes to pangenomes with gen
103 investigations, allowing for the unambiguous
comparison of strains with global coverage.
104 Transcriptome
comparisons of SOX9+ cells with GLT1+ cells showed that
105 comparison of standard repair with mesh, and
comparison of standard repair with graft.
106 Furthermore,
comparison of our RNA-seq data with Gro and RNA polymera
107 In a multistate model, the hazard ratios for
comparisons of physical activity with health education w
108 Comparison of this data set with high-resolution seed an
109 that target 4E-T to P-bodies was enabled by
comparison of vertebrate proteins with homologues in Dro
110 Comparison of i.m. vaccinations with HSV2-gD27 versus gD
111 Comparison of cells with identical oocyte-derived nuclea
112 of TF diversification, we performed detailed
comparisons of yeast C2H2 ZF proteins with identical can
113 ient, 3D models of vascularized tissues, and
comparison of predictions with in vivo or in vitro exper
114 A
comparison of this structure with inactive- and active-s
115 Comparisons of climate model hindcasts with independent
116 Structural
comparison of DNA-bound MepR with '
induced' apoMepR reve
117 A
comparison of deposition data with industrial production
118 of solvent dynamics, and it permits a direct
comparison of simulation results with infrared spectrosc
119 Comparison of STA obtained with inputs at various dendri
120 Comparison of the viral complex with its human counterpa
121 Comparison of our results with kinetic and structural st
122 A
comparison of EBNA3 binding sites with known transcripti
123 Comparison of Sabin-like virus recombinants with known N
124 Comparison of EME-MS with LC-MS for drug metabolism anal
125 This could have resulted in a
comparison of fit statin users with less fit nonstatin u
126 Moreover,
comparisons of fins with limbs have been limited by a re
127 s was based on deconvoluted mass spectra and
comparison of linear retention indices (LRI) with litera
128 This Tric-LUC reporter allowed a direct
comparison of luciferase activity with locomotor activit
129 Based on these results, a head-to-head
comparison of rivaroxaban with long-term low-molecular-w
130 follow-up range: 5-24 y), pooled RRs for the
comparison of the highest with lowest categories of tota
131 tivariable-adjusted RRs (95% CIs) of GDM for
comparisons of highest with lowest quartiles were 1.27 (
132 Comparison of LC-MS with MA revealed that MA inaccuratel
133 ed of a randomized clinical trial design and
comparison of the ICD with medical therapy (control) in
134 Structural
comparison of TgALD1 and TgDPA with members of their res
135 wn about whether these patterns exist in the
comparison of young women with men.
136 igned to one of the three treatment options,
comparison of standard repair with mesh, and comparison
137 Comparison of full-field ERG recordings with microfiber
138 A
comparison of experimental data with model simulations s
139 The
comparison of our neutron spectroscopy data with model s
140 Comparison of our experimental findings with molecular d
141 Moreover,
comparison of multiple alignment with motif analysis sho
142 Comparison of our proteomic data with mouse and human da
143 and interactions by allowing observation and
comparison of ligand interactions with multiple proteins
144 Comparison of this statistics-based description with new
145 Comparison of these results with Nkd function in Drosoph
146 Comparison of the RDC-selected ensemble with NMR spin re
147 We performed a case-case
comparison of emm32.2 iGAS cases with non-emm32.2 contro
148 s, and the lack of standardization, make the
comparison of ion channel models with one another and wi
149 Comparison of this map with one derived from the unimpai
150 A
comparison of DNA constructs with or without GQ in the o
151 pancy in positive and negative controls, and
comparisons of estimated site occupancy with orthogonal
152 On
comparison of cases versus controls with OSSN, HIV-posit
153 Comparison of 2014 funding levels with other malignancie
154 A structural
comparison of FnCas9 with other Cas9 orthologs revealed
155 A
comparison of NPR Scythian mtDNA linages with other cont
156 Comparison of our approach with other integrative approa
157 The
comparison of pathogen risk with other potential impacts
158 A
comparison of the Little Darby stromatolites with other
159 Comparison of the proposed method with other ones demons
160 Finally, we have performed a systematic
comparison of the RECQL5 structures with other RecQ fami
161 e absolute configurations were determined by
comparison of their ECD spectra with other experimental
162 Comparisons of gene diversity with other aquatic habitat
163 Comparison of the current XN structure with our previous
164 In the overall
comparison of patients with pancreatic cancer and diabet
165 Comparison of aril juices with peel and seed extracts is
166 fracture connectivity is determined through
comparison of fracture parameters with permeability.
167 However, data on
comparisons of these methods with PET methods to determi
168 Comparisons of changes of cardiac genes with phenotypic
169 Moreover,
comparison of SSR-based data with phenylpropanoid molecu
170 well as host-cell adhesion by Acinetobacter
Comparisons of genomic and structural data with pilin pr
171 Structural
comparison of PilM with PilM.PilN(1-12) revealed that up
172 For the
comparison of clonidine with placebo, patients were rand
173 the 5-mg dose with placebo; P<0.001 for the
comparison of the 10-mg dose with placebo); the rate was
174 the 5-mg dose with placebo; P<0.001 for the
comparison of the 10-mg dose with placebo); the score ch
175 ith 33% in the placebo group (P=0.01 for the
comparison of the 5-mg dose with placebo; P<0.001 for th
176 -0.18 in the placebo group (P=0.006 for the
comparison of the 5-mg dose with placebo; P<0.001 for th
177 he 52-week prednisone taper (P<0.001 for the
comparisons of either active treatment with placebo).
178 cotherapy and psychotherapy trials, indirect
comparisons of their effect sizes compared with placebo
179 ry much improved" or "much improved"), and a
comparison of rates of augmentation with pregabalin and
180 A recovery ratio (
comparison of postoperative with preoperative mJOA score
181 Comparison of probit model results with previous results
182 ffects of temperature on productivity, and a
comparison of results with previous published modeling a
183 Comparison of the changes observed here with previous re
184 After
comparison of these results with previous similar studie
185 led atmospheric and fluvial Hg fluxes, and a
comparison of this work with previous measurements indic
186 mbining a linear-time algorithm for implicit
comparison of all pairs of models with profile hashing t
187 tions meant that 40-89% were non-replicable;
comparisons of protocols with publications showed that m
188 Based on the
comparison of our results with published data, we propos
189 Direct
comparison of simulations with published experimental da
190 Comparison of the overall associations with published re
191 In direct
comparison of pure rPH with pure iPH, severe cerebral WM
192 Finally,
comparison of dPCR with qPCR results on clinical samples
193 A
comparison of the new temperature reconstruction with ra
194 Comparison of ECRP with reduction potentials measured po
195 e this trend via simulations of plasmidomes,
comparisons of predictions with reference data for isola
196 Comparison of land movement with relative sea-level rise
197 A
comparison of our data with reported methylome changes i
198 The
comparison of persistent with resolved MetS and MUO did
199 DeltaFM than to DeltaFFM; however, a direct
comparison of the 2 indexes with respect to change in th
200 the ENC, and we focused our analysis on the
comparison of the ENC domain with respect to its wild ty
201 Comparison of PARE peaks in strains with RNase III prese
202 Comparison of CSG with RSI detected a highly significant
203 Comparison of vertical accretion rates with RSLR rates a
204 Comparison of in situ fluorescence lifetimes with satell
205 We include a
comparison of PMS8 with several state of the art algorit
206 Comparison of the experimental images with simulations a
207 Benchmarking the method by
comparison of average peptide PFs with site-resolved NMR
208 Comparison of this model with SIV-infected non-CD8(+) ly
209 A structural
comparison of SaCas9 with SpCas9 highlighted both struct
210 Comparison of the cell spectra with spectra of trehalose
211 dvanced-stage EAC: in a stratified analysis,
comparison of 189 cases with stage 0-1 EAC to 520 contro
212 Comparison of monocular BEFIE tests with standard conven
213 on/accurate mass measurement of Orbitrap and
comparison of the retardation factors with standards.
214 n trees from tandem mass spectra, and on the
comparison of these parameters with standards.
215 Comparison of cocrystal structures with structure-activi
216 A structural
comparison of SULT1A3 with SULT1A1 (its immediate evolut
217 A
comparison of the model results with surface observation
218 A
comparison of median scores of participants with symptom
219 Comparison of the crude fungal extract with synthetic ru
220 Comparison of Lmo2-/- with Tal1-/- Flk-1+ cells further
221 Comparison of combined intervention with TAU, and of int
222 Comparison of TP4-binding with Tau aggregation reveals t
223 Comparison of air-water fluxes with temperature suggeste
224 m Thrombolysis) trial was a randomized (1:1)
comparison of thrombolysis with tenecteplase versus plac
225 ssion levels in modern maize is supported by
comparisons of relative protein levels with teosinte as
226 The
comparison of the experimental diffusion-profile with th
227 7 template, we were able to perform a direct
comparison of catalytic activity with that of the less a
228 Comparison of our data with that compiled in budding yea
229 Comparison of our structure with that of a previously re
230 Comparison of our structure with that of HIV RT explains
231 By
comparison of SFTSV Gc with that of the prefusion struct
232 Importantly,
comparison of the alkylation fingerprint with that gener
233 Comparison of the reactivity of 2 with that of a more el
234 Comparison of Y704A mRNA synthesis with that of the wild
235 comprehensive study provide a framework for
comparison of complex adult populations with the early b
236 Comparison of formate production with the ingestion of d
237 Comparison of Galpha with the small G protein Ras reveal
238 Finally, a
comparison of IRAB-B with the IR antagonist S961 shows d
239 P) in the action of ISO on HPC expansion and
comparison of ISO with the current standard of care, N-a
240 We recommend direct
comparison of means between groups with the use of basel
241 rigorous statistical method for quantitative
comparison of multiple ChIP-seq datasets with the consid
242 Comparison of observer's scores with the area-based dens
243 in 20 gene families were identified through
comparison of P. xylostella genome with the genomes of o
244 A
comparison of peptide oxidation levels with the values o
245 This allowed direct
comparison of present transcriptomic data with the earli
246 Consistently, a
comparison of published morphant defects with the Sanger
247 Comparison of reaction outcomes with the same reactions
248 dentify 18,210 structural variants by direct
comparison of the assembly with the human reference, ide
249 In a
comparison of the baseline period with the EOS calculato
250 Comparison of the dCON group with the MCI group revealed
251 aningfulness of chirality were determined by
comparison of the distribution of enantiomers with the e
252 Comparison of the edited with the original spectrum sign
253 s spectrometry (MS) is generally achieved by
comparison of the experimental mass spectra with the the
254 Based on the
comparison of the observed transient spectra with the on
255 Comparison of the octamer with the hexadecamer structure
256 A
comparison of the proposed method with the existing lite
257 Comparison of the structure with the unrelated H3.3-spec
258 A
comparison of the STSIS technique with the SIS technique
259 Comparison of the UV-detected MWD with the MWD of the "b
260 Comparison of the wild type with the capsule-switching m
261 Pho84 was used to study the release of Pi A
comparison of this conformation with the model for Pi re
262 Comparison of this structure with the closed-state struc
263 Comprehensive
comparisons of RegLRSD with the state-of-the-art algorit
264 e alignments of 1,10- and 1,11-synthases and
comparisons of X-ray crystal structures with the homolog
265 Structural
comparison of C2c1 ternary complexes with their Cas9 and
266 Nonetheless,
comparison of colorectal carcinomas with their adjacent
267 rochemical studies is usually undertaken via
comparison of the experimental results with theory based
268 The experimental data were analyzed by
comparison of the observed scattering profiles with thos
269 2D NMR spectroscopic analysis and
comparison of (13)C chemical shifts with those of the co
270 Comparison of adapted populations with those found on le
271 bjects were also evaluated in this study for
comparison of biomarkers with those seen in asthmatic pa
272 Comparison of observed cross sections with those obtaine
273 The
comparison of our results with those obtained under conv
274 ssful analysis of the IgE in human serum and
comparison of results with those from a commercial kit.
275 Comparison of ROX crystal structures with those of other
276 Comparison of tcp20 mutants with those of nlp7 mutants,
277 Comparison of the apo-FluPol structure with those of pro
278 We furthermore provide a direct
comparison of the capabilities of LDA with those of the
279 Comparison of the PPHD structures with those of HIF and
280 y analysis of reference material (RM) and by
comparison of the results with those obtained using conv
281 Comparison of the results with those obtained via tradit
282 Comparison of these results with those from other classe
283 The
comparison of these results with those from other verteb
284 d CCG258748) in complex with GRK2-Gbetagamma
Comparison of these structures with those of analogous b
285 Comparisons of modern human brains with those of chimpan
286 ctra exist for reference hydrocarbons making
comparisons of reference spectra with those of the unkno
287 Comparisons of this structure with those from bacterial
288 A
comparison of our model with traditional and simpler MLR
289 Comparison of mice infected with two scrapie strains (22
290 Comparisons of 3-Ni with two further U-Ni complexes XU(I
291 Comparison of our computational Viral RPs with UniProt's
292 Comparison of reactants with various substitution groups
293 Structural
comparison of VP24 with VP26 and VP28 reveals opposite e
294 he presence of any VHD did not influence the
comparison of dabigatran with warfarin.
295 Comparison of the ChIP-seq profile with whole-transcript
296 Comparison of the alignment quality with widely used alg
297 Comparison of dKO mice with wild-type (Wt) and single kn
298 Comparison of these animals with wild-type mice demonstr
299 Comparison of these mice with wild type and globally MeC
300 By
comparison of Tim22 Cys --> Ser mutants with wild-type T