ライフサイエンスコーパス: household

1 12 (345,193 observations from 110,539 unique households).

2 t the population level may occur outside the household.

3 ad exposures to a mean of 13.6 exposures per household.

4 ensure water safety remains with individual households.

5 rinse, food, soil, and fly samples from 608 households.

6 r the lowest- compared to the highest-income households.

7 f SSBs, with larger decreases for low-income households.

8 llowed a cohort of 1341 individuals from 340 households.

9 supplying latrine platform products to rural households.

10 ial financial risk protection for vulnerable households.

11 ttention to ensure safe water among affected households.

12 harmful to the financial well-being of many households.

13 st resources and further marginalizing these households.

14 benefits of ozone reductions for low-income households.

15 beverage purchases in both SNAP and non-SNAP households.

16 bserved characteristics of children or their households.

17 ticides than did samples from non-farmworker households.

18 duced food insecurity in wetter than average households.

19 95% CI, 0.86-1.06) or number of dogs in the household (1 dog: adjusted HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91-1.26;

20 iduals) in the intervention group and 26 291 households (109 693 individuals) in the control group co

21 27 091 households (114 168 individuals) in the intervention gro

22 ry 2011 to March 2014 in a sample of 109,689 households (87.1% participation) in 1,017 clusters repre

23 We enrolled 10 750 children from 8626 households across 150 clusters between Dec 9, 2013, and

24 ecommended establishment of a "health-based, household action level" for lead in drinking water based

25 respectively, underscoring the importance of household actions in influencing urban watershed nutrien

26 The economic burden on households affected by tuberculosis through costs to pat

27 surrogate of exposure to PM2.5 in studies of household air pollution and the consistency of the PM2.5

28 ighest lung cancer rates in the world due to household air pollution from combustion of smoky coal fo

29 Placental pathology associated with household air pollution in a cohort of pregnant women fr

30 educe adverse health impacts associated with household air pollution.

31 le organic carbon and nitrogen (p < 0.01) in household air samples.

32 We observe that household air-conditioning adoption, which increased dra

33 and for TB-sensitive cash transfers was poor households already targeted by countries' established po

34 ed by P. vivax, was shown to cluster at both household and community levels.

35 been widely used in the production of common household and consumer goods for their nonflammable, lip

36 ations, including construction and building, household and furniture, and automotive for the period f

37 Household and individual adult questionnaires were admin

38 on checklist to extract relevant data at the household and individual level from the included full te

39 Widespread use of organic chemicals in household and personal care products (HPCPs) and their d

40 about 1.5 km (2.2 km if infections linked to household and school transmission are excluded).

41 n activity regarding contacts not related to household and school.

42 vered a population of 1 169 593 from 270 387 households and 451 villages.

43 s, such as septic systems, serve 20% of U.S. households and are common in areas not served by wastewa

44 od waste at the end of the food value chain (households and food services) causes almost 60% of the t

45 eatment seemed justified within RDT-positive households and potentially worth considering within, for

46 and environmental samples from case patient households and surrounding areas for influenza viruses.

47 ith inference from a small sample of in-camp households and the reliance on a rough figure of 400,000

48 age (defined by a 200 m radius surrounding a household) and individual household latrine ownership wi

49 We examined 797 (in 329 households) and 872 (in 353 households) subjects, who we

50 effects meta-analyses to examine individual, household, and community effects associated with ACT cov

51 sed, the first is not clearly connected with households, and the second is confounded by abandonment

52 More risk-averse households are less likely to move, while less risk-aver

53 table in house dust collected from different household areas and whether levels are increased after i

54 orting for the first time the direct role of household as potential source of azole-resistant invasiv

55 exotic or expensive-to-manufacture goods in household assemblages, have been proposed, the first is

56 numeration areas in Swaziland, who underwent household-based counselling and rapid HIV testing during

57 Local communities, particularly the poorest households, benefit from work and trade opportunities of

58 ia, where the Indian government has promoted household biogas.

59 crofinance groups leads to an improvement in household business outcomes and women's empowerment.

60 This effect is significant for rural households but not for urban households, suggesting diff

61 stove use and primary outcomes, stratifying households by proximity to major industrial plants.

62 tries (847685 surveys) were used to classify households by sanitation facility (facilities needing FS

63 ing a data set of US households' (n = 98,256 household-by-quarter observations) packaged food and bev

64 their combined cost was less than 20% of the households' capacity to pay.

65 the United States, does growing up in a poor household cause negative developmental outcomes for chil

66 r mild conditions using a globally available household chemical, vinegar.

67 We conducted a double-blind, household-cluster-randomized, placebo-controlled clinica

68 sessed its utility for analyzing data from a household cohort maintained in part for study of influen

69 ouseholds were interviewed about the current household composition and any killings and kidnappings o

70 2012, overall and by subpopulations based on household composition, race/ethnicity, and income.

71 We show that upstream emissions from urban household consumption are in the same order of magnitude

72 catastrophic when it exceeded 10% or 25% of household consumption.

73 Of household contacts not diagnosed with EVD, 47.6% (229 of

74 ed up initially healthy individuals who were household contacts of symptomatic persons with laborator

75 to Ebola virus in a cross-sectional study of household contacts of the survivors.

76 t and incident tuberculosis were assessed in household contacts through clinical, radiographical, and

77 However, faecal shedding of Sabin 2 in household contacts was increased significantly with bOPV

78 These 35 patients' 209 household contacts were followed with prevalence surveys

79 nt skin infections, and similar infection in household contacts, did not differ significantly.

80 Yazidi households contained 6,572 living residents at the time

81 aimed to test the effectiveness of lockable household containers for prevention of pesticide self-po

82 Among household cookstoves, emission factors (EF; g (kg wood)(

83 nd unmet needs for healthcare using national household data from the "Hellas Health" surveys.

84 In conclusion, current household demand for latrine platform products is too lo

85 and validated for PCMC (4-chloro-m-cresol), household derived antimicrobial agent with no known expo

86 In single- and multiple-person households, dog ownership (13.1%) was associated with lo

87 In single-person households, dog ownership was inversely associated with

88 and 61,847 women) were enumerated in 46,714 households during the first annual round (December 2013

89 e a correlation between cat serum levels and household dust has been established, a finding that supp

90 o organohalogen compounds (OHCs) adsorbed to household dust in home environments.

91 more than twice, compared to the background household dust.

92 mong households without a latrine; for these households, each 10% increase in latrine coverage was as

93 low SES (household income of <$50,000/y and household educational level of less than a Bachelor's de

94 vel resource recovery to impact nutrient and household electricity use through 2030.

95 bility of agricultural nutrients (SDG 2) and household energy (SDG 7).

96 h strategy, 26 studies (13,999 children with household exposure to tuberculosis and 174,097 children

97 hildren raised in economically disadvantaged households face increased risks of poor health in adulth

98 However, in drier than average households, financial services as compared to agricultur

99 rom young children and mothers in 32 Ugandan households for a median of one year.

100 of adolescents ascertained from schools and households from the National Comorbidity Survey Replicat

101 1688 households had at least one child with unknown HIV statu

102 Samples from farmworker households had higher indoor air concentrations of both

103 ories and sodium).Regardless of SNAP status, households had low mean purchases of fruit, vegetables,

104 9), and having >/=5 siblings/children in the household (HR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.03-4.88).

105 everage products recorded as purchased by US households in 2007-2012 (345,193 observations from 110,5

106 f men and women aged 18-49 years from 14 891 households in 575 enumeration areas in Swaziland, who un

107 nalogs at 14 farmworker and 9 non-farmworker households in an agricultural region of central Washingt

108 We applied our model to households in Greeley, Colorado, which is in the middle

109 We implemented active surveillance in 297 households in Peru from October 2012 to August 2015 to a

110 olds in the no-incentive group, in 316 (48%) households in the $2 incentive group (adjusted odds rati

111 148 households in the no-incentive group, 63 households in the $2 incentive group, and 81 households

112 .77-4.85; p<0.0001), and in 223 (40%) of 562 households in the lottery group (2.66, 2.00-3.55; p<0.00

113 households in the $2 incentive group, and 81 households in the lottery group.

114 Children were unavailable in 148 households in the no-incentive group, 63 households in t

115 t least one child was HIV tested in 93 (20%) households in the no-incentive group, in 316 (48%) house

116 percent points a year across all countries; households in the two poorest quintiles had an increase

117 Households in these villages were enrolled in 2013 for a

118 The primary outcome was the proportion of households in which at least one child had an HIV test w

119 potentially misreported SNAP status.American households, including SNAP households, show room for imp

120 public insurance (OR = 1.90; CI, 1.56-2.31), household income >400% of the poverty threshold (OR = 1.

121 Hispanic white: 16%; no college degree: 35%; household income <$50,000: 26%).

122 used a median split of income inequality and household income (income-to-needs ratio) to create four

123 , occupation [farmer and non-farmer], annual household income [< yen10 000, yen10 000-50 000, and >/=

124 come inequality (ie, the variation in median household income among households within a geographic ar

125 After adjustment for median household income and state of residence, ACSC hospitaliz

126 onomic model to include these impacts across household income categories, and present its first appli

127 The median total household income for the study sample was 8,075 PKR (app

128 s; for example, a $20,000 increase in median household income in a child's ZIP code was associated wi

129 , 1.32; 95% CI, 1.06-1.63), and those with a household income in US dollars of $20001 to $40000 (IRR,

130 The effect of low SES (household income of <$50,000/y and household educational

131 c (education, neighbourhood deprivation, and household income), and psychological (depressive symptom

132 al burden (OOP expenditures divided by total household income).

133 our measures (education level, social class, household income, and area-based deprivation) using Cox

134 , stillbirths, health-care access and costs, household income, and assets.

135 ality] to 1.00 [perfect inequality]), median household income, and total population of children aged

136 paternal educational levels, annual taxable household income, cohabiting parents, and number of sibl

137 untries' mean patient TB-related costs, mean household income, mean cash transfers, and estimated TB-

138 were performed for age, sex, smoking status, household income, obesity status, and asthma status.

139 Participants reported their household income, out-of-pocket medical costs, and issue

140 with indicators of health disparities (e.g., household income, proportion of nonwhite residents).

141 ome, both low-income area and low individual household income, were independent predictors of a highe

142 th differing levels of income inequality and household income.

143 ts to patients exceeding 20% of total annual household income.

144 the relative benefits of ozone policies with household income: (1) unequal ozone reductions; (2) poli

145 cash transfer approach to increase all poor households' income may have broad benefits by reducing p

146 Data from the Household, Income Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey we

147 tant tuberculosis could reduce the number of households incurring tuberculosis-related catastrophic c

148 ealth Interview Survey, a national in-person household interview survey.

149 Face-to-face household interviews with adolescents and questionnaires

150 g have undermined wage gains and driven many households into debt and even bankruptcy.

151 The household is a potentially important but understudied un

152 dius surrounding a household) and individual household latrine ownership with child growth and househ

153 Household level data from the Demographic and Health Sur

154 a collection at both the health facility and household level should be implemented.

155 -stage cluster sample design (at village and household level) was carried out in Burera District in M

156 ming most plausibly developed gradually at a household level, but the increased importance of land-ba

157 inary least-squares models, clustered at the household level, to examine the association between SNAP

158 assessed affordability using individual- and household-level income and expenditure data collected fr

159 Our aims were to test the hypothesis that household-level interventions, specifically improved-tec

160 deficiencies, malaria, and inflammation) and household-level predictors; we also examined the proport

161 (NDVI) based on the GPS coordinates of their household location.

162 Samples from proximal households (</= 250 m) had significantly higher outdoor

163 ioral, situational and financial barriers to households managing their own well water safety, resulti

164 Low-income households may be disproportionately affected by ozone p

165 high-inequality neighborhoods and low-income households may experience greater HPA and HPG activity,

166 aving an increasing number of HHV-8-infected household members (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.09-2.79), and hav

167 ionnaires were administered to senior female household members and data were collected by a team of f

168 position and any killings and kidnappings of household members by ISIS.

169 4; 11 of 92) with symptoms at the time other household members had EVD, and 2.6% (1.2-4.7; 10 of 388)

170 ults ages 18 years and older with coresiding household members surveyed, data from 7,522 adults (mean

171 prospective cohort of 270 children and their household members to investigate risk factors for HHV-8

172 All available household members were examined.

173 All household members were interviewed.

174 Two household members were randomly selected for a head-to-t

175 he survey; 43 killings and 83 kidnappings of household members were reported.

176 r air pollution, previous tuberculosis among household members, and living in a household with a low

177 e staff, and direct contact with patients or household members.

178 tiology of incident chronic conditions among household members.

179 s and nonparticipants.Using a data set of US households' (n = 98,256 household-by-quarter observation

180 As household net worth increased, youths were increasingly

181 interval, 2.8-19.9) for those living in the household of an RDT-positive individual and 1.64 (1.0-2.

182 Households of index patients were visited by fieldworker

183 Treating everyone within households of RDT-positive individuals (1% population) w

184 for age, sex, and residential location from households of the general population.

185 xy indicators of physical proximity to other households or connections to many sick people.

186 3 (95% CI: 1.52, 1.97)] versus higher-income households [OR=1.31 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.55); p-interaction=

187 pacts of for example products, technologies, households, or nations.

188 l point to NESMD as a promising solution for household- or community-scale desalination.

189 om these beverages given the purchases of US households overall and by subpopulations.On the basis of

190 hos-methyl than did samples from nonproximal households (p </= 0.02).

191 In total, 198 IHO worker-child household pairs and 202 community referent (CR) adult-ch

192 and 202 community referent (CR) adult-child household pairs completed a questionnaire and provided a

193 cted from 1,626 individuals from the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) between 1996 and 2008.

194 Maternal supplemental FA and household pesticide product use were retrospectively col

195 20 457 household pesticide storage containers were distributed.

196 The use of safer household pesticide storage has been promoted to prevent

197 idence that means reduction through improved household pesticide storage reduces pesticide self-poiso

198 Household poverty was measured by income-to-needs ratios

199 r various short time-intervals prevailing in household practice.

200 nd their outcomes, morbidity, mortality, and household practices related to maternal and newborn care

201 tors were preparation of poultry meat in the household; preparation of uncooked food and raw meat at

202 ega-subunit on photosynthesis but not on all household processes suggests that the omega-subunit migh

203 Mice from African pastoral households provide a referential model for habitat parti

204 How wealth is distributed among households provides insight into the fundamental charact

205 ealth-care utilisation survey in a sample of households randomly selected from each study area to inv

206 Moreover, we show that households reduce EEC immediately after being informed t

207 in IHO workers and children living in their households remains unclear.

208 d sugars obtained from packaged beverages US households reported buying in 2007-2008, 2009-2010, and

209 data to examine how rainfall variability and household resources are correlated with food security.

210 s model to identify index case, contact, and household risk factors for tuberculosis from which to de

211 terms of clinical response to treatment and household RUTF use.We conducted a nonrandomized pilot in

212 distal risk factors (e.g., education status, household sanitation and hygiene, and urban or rural res

213 ersely with wealth: in the poorest quintile, households' sanitation facilities were almost 170 times

214 multistage cluster design with random route household selection.

215 oup randomized controlled trial, we enrolled household shoppers across New Zealand who owned smartpho

216 P status.American households, including SNAP households, show room for improvement in the nutritional

217 which decreased over age but increased with household size, years of education and income level.

218 Our data indicate that household smoking may predispose neonates with muco-obst

219 Lower body-mass index (BMI) z-score and household smoking were strong predictors of higher BDE-1

220 ase being in a male patient, lower community household socioeconomic position, indoor air pollution,

221 cantly predicted by the following variables: household socioeconomic status in childhood, extended ab

222 wed consistent significant associations with household socioeconomic status.

223 e persists, although pollution levels in ICS households still remained above WHO guidelines.

224 a.In this cross-sectional study, we examined household store purchases of key food, beverage, and nut

225 hold latrine ownership with child growth and household stored water quality.

226 it turns out, this is the shape of a common household strainer.

227 lable, accounting for demographic structure, household structure where known, and a variety of metric

228 ined 797 (in 329 households) and 872 (in 353 households) subjects, who were assigned randomly into th

229 icant for rural households but not for urban households, suggesting differing dependence on watershed

230 We did a household survey (RAMOS-II) in the urban area of Kabul c

231 We assembled 235 geographically resolved household survey and census data sources on child deaths

232 o rounds (January, 2015, and May, 2016) of a household survey for women who had given birth up to 2 y

233 Health and Retirement Study, a longitudinal household survey representative of the older US populati

234 Of the total 637 participants, 44 (37.0%) household survey respondents, 51 (23.4%) managed care re

235 We conducted a retrospective household survey to estimate the number and demographic

236 from all nationally available representative household surveys (the Malaria Indicator Surveys, Demogr

237 Of 1566 potentially suitable household surveys, 553 passed quality checks, covering 1

238 of health spending using data obtained from household surveys.

239 Pacific, using standardised population-based household surveys.

240 ic test [RDT]), which is available in recent household surveys.

241 Arsenic concentration in household tap water and urine samples were measured usin

242 We find that on average, households that experienced a drier than average year ar

243 Intervention households that had farmed or had used or stored pestici

244 eedom may have inadvertently shifted risk to households, thereby generating a costly public health pr

245 pe houses were randomly allocated to village households through a free, fair, and transparent lottery

246 d without out-of-pocket spending included in household total consumption.

247 e individual- and population-level impact of household tuberculosis exposure on transmission is uncle

248 ified by trial centre, general practice, and household type.

249 enerator to investigate the effect of normal household usage flow patterns on lead exposure.

250 Over all surveyed nations, 63% of households used facilities requiring FSM, totaling appro

251 Household visits were made weekly for morbidity surveill

252 he level of sanitation access of surrounding households was more important than private latrine acces

253 the average cost of supplying the SanPlat to households was US$7.51.

254 Preference-based mitigation, such as reduced household waste or lower consumption of animal-based pro

255 ed among those with <1mug/L arsenic in their household water (19.2% increase in total urinary arsenic

256 ine coverage, while child weight-for-age and household water quality had nonlinear relationships that

257 n development were associated with increased household wealth (6.07 points [95% CI 3.22 to 8.92] in t

258 f this study is that residual confounding by household wealth of the observed association between hou

259 ars), time period, and socioeconomic status (household wealth) quintile for HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis

260 e the nitrogen for 1 week from a four-person household were lowest for Dowex Mac 3 (5 L) and highest

261 onths food insecure, and wetter than average households were 2.86 months food insecure.

262 eholds were assigned no incentive, 740 (34%) households were assigned a $2 incentive, and 661 (32%) h

263 649 (32%) households were assigned no incentive, 740 (34%) househo

264 were assigned a $2 incentive, and 661 (32%) households were assigned to lottery participation.

265 tween Aug 4, and Dec 18, 2015, 2050 eligible households were enrolled in the prevalence survey.

266 ween November, 2014, and March, 2015, 21 494 households were identified in 20 towns.

267 A systematic random sample of 1,300 in-camp households were interviewed about the current household

268 Thirty-three households were monitored in a full-scale water distribu

269 One thousand twenty-three people from 922 households were randomised between 2012-2013 to one of t

270 Clusters of households were randomly assigned (1:1), with a sequence

271 Eligible households were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either rece

272 1, 2015, and Dec 22, 2015, 7934 (91%) of the households were re-enrolled.

273 mately 7200 people in 1500 randomly selected households were visited 3 times per week.

274 For concrete latrine SanPlats, 60% of households were willing to pay US$0.48 and 10% of househ

275 holds were willing to pay US$0.48 and 10% of households were willing to pay US$4.05, yet the average

276 DDT exposure and increasing the frequency of household wet mopping significantly reduced p,p'-DDT and

277 n be measured by the percentage of people in households whose out-of-pocket health expenditures are l

278 less likely to move, while less risk-averse households will seek out opportunities and migrate.

279 sis among household members, and living in a household with a low number of windows per room.

280 Households with >/=4 individuals, including >/=2 childre

281 Within clusters, households with a child under the age of 4.5 years were

282 er be provided to defray TB-related costs of households with a confirmed TB diagnosis (termed a "TB-s

283 tion for TB-specific cash transfers was poor households with a confirmed TB diagnosis, and for TB-sen

284 oach to defray TB-related costs only in poor households with a confirmed TB diagnosis.

285 efforts to minimize HHV-8 transmission, and households with a large number of siblings should receiv

286 en between May, 2013, and August, 2013, 8734 households with children younger than 5 years of age wer

287 om 7,522 adults (mean age 39 years) in 2,574 households with complete covariate information were anal

288 ss to safe water and sanitation; 2) lived in households with finished floors, a television, and a car

289 pecific" approach); or to increase income of households with high TB risk to strengthen their economi

290 girls only outperformed boys when living in households with higher socioeconomic status (2.87 points

291 e caries free, children with S-ECC came from households with lower income; they were more likely to l

292 cat allergens in DCC often reached levels of households with pets.

293 e, lead concentrations were however lower in households with PLSLRs as compared to those with no repl

294 ucher-based real-money sales trial with 1638 households with unimproved latrines.

295 duction in EEC comes almost exclusively from households with very high EEC before the policy change.

296 m cluster randomised trial was randomised by household, with 12-mo follow-up, in seven London, United

297 e variation in median household income among households within a geographic area), in addition to fam

298 ge year are 3.81 months food insecure, while households within a normal range of rainfall were 3.67 m

299 tors such as age, education, and location of households within high-risk clusters, as well as factors

300 s arising from MWIs at postcodes (average 12 households) within 10 km of MWIs in Great Britain (GB) i

301 overage and child height was strongest among households without a latrine; for these households, each