ライフサイエンスコーパス: economic status

1 patterns of social ties affect individuals' economic status.

2 network, is highly correlated with personal economic status.

3 ritional status, educational attainment, and economic status.

4 ing due to age, sex, smoking, race and socio-economic status.

5 determined based on self-reported household economic status.

6 essment was negatively associated with socio-economic status.

7 ontrolling for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and economic status.

8 pitalizations by geographic region and socio-economic status.

9 ied by comparable international quintiles of economic status.

10 nd environmental risk factors, stratified by economic status.

11 al evaluation including patients' social and economic status.

12 educated to degree level or of higher socio-economic status.

13 ans and to benefit donors by improving their economic status.

14 erall in age, sex, percentage of blacks, and economic status.

15 f allergic sensitization (age, sex and socio-economic status adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence inte

16 f these variables may be indicative of socio-economic status and could be used as proxies of exposure

17 e consistent across communities of different economic status and geographic regions since efforts to

18 on Successful Midlife Development and Socio-economic Status and Health, Unilever, and Departments of

19 ender, distance from screening center, socio-economic status and length of time since they were last

20 mental health symptoms and behaviours, socio-economic status and mental health service contact).

21 After adjustment for age, urbanization, economic status and metabolic factors, BLL was independe

22 y noted relationship between childhood socio-economic status and oral health in adulthood appears, wi

23 plementary dimensions of inequality (such as economic status and urban/rural residence) as well as se

24 h factors such as geographic location, socio-economic status, and dietary habits.

25 g for sex, age, race, ethnicity, site, socio-economic status, and hour of the day when the TSST was c

26 uding contact HIV status, contact age, socio-economic status, and index case sputum smear grade, the

27 ish monolinguals matched in education, socio-economic status, and musical experience.

28 dictors such as demographic variables, socio-economic status, and self-rated health; the density of b

29 Subjects in rural and high-economic-status areas had significantly greater BLL (P <

30 nificantly lower than those in urban and low-economic-status areas.

31 ed from sale, how money was spent, change in economic status, change in health status, advice for oth

32 Data on economic status, child underweight, water and sanitation

33 is was altered by region of residence, socio-economic status, country of birth or history of migratio

34 Marked changes in socio-economic status, cultural traditions, population growth

35 t poverty, particularly in the form of worse economic status, diminished wealth, and unemployment is

36 tation availability, hygiene practice, socio-economic status, education level, filter operation and m

37 alth and disease exist, including social and economic status, education, employment, housing, and phy

38 iderably across different dimensions such as economic status, education, sex, and urban/rural residen

39 rence greater than 1% in 24 populations; and economic status for 15 of 18 populations with a differen

40 tion was less common in women with low socio-economic status, HIV infection and undernutrition, but w

41 nd in neighborhoods with low educational and economic status levels, high levels of public disorder a

42 Controlling for sex and socio-economic status, lower DHA concentrations were associate

43 Age, race, stage of cancer, economic status (measured by availability of medical ins

44 e effects of interventions vary based on the economic status of intervention recipients.

45 species body mass, taxonomic group and socio-economic status of study site are important predictors o

46 ible to make sustainable improvements in the economic status of the poor with a relatively short-term

47 nce (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.46-3.01), higher socio-economic status (OR 4.1; 95% CI 2.40-6.98), and increasi

48 confounders such as age, sex, region, socio-economic status, other lifestyle factors, body mass inde

49 ucation, knowledge about malaria/IPTp, socio-economic status, parity, and number and timing of antena

50 me-varying confounding included age, income, economic status, relationship (couple) status, and physi

51 The relationship between socio-economic status (SES) and oral health is well-establishe

52 Individuals with lower socio-economic status (SES) are at increased risk of physical

53 women are more likely to have a lower socio-economic status (SES) but it is unclear whether SES is a

54 roportions of European ancestry (PEA), socio economic status (SES), body mass index (BMI), alcohol co

55 ses survey data to calculate household socio-economic-status (SES) indices in seven countries where n

56 Zambia have substantially poorer social and economic status than do their peers with non-stigmatised

57 likely to be female and have a higher socio-economic status than those who did not report reactions

58 3 dominate in most countries irrespective of economic status, the largest proportions of genotypes 4

59 As countries progress to higher economic status, the rate of late presentation is expect

60 d not vary after adjusting for common social economic status variables (e.g. household income), envir

61 Negative impact on marriage, employment, and economic status was found in patients with IBD.

62 data on solid waste, population density, and economic status, we estimated the mass of land-based pla

63 N coverage, household demographics and socio-economic status were collected using an adapted version

64 worldwide, and their disproportionately poor economic status, women need special consideration in dis