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                                       Single institutional.
2                             The 2007 to 2012 institutional ACS-NSQIP and administrative databases for
3                        Conclusion This multi-institutional analysis demonstrated that the use of upfr
4                                   This multi-institutional analysis sought to determine the optimal m
5 ioinformatic work is such that its cultural, institutional and technical structures allow for it to b
6 ch with the explicit goal of fostering multi-institutional and transdisciplinary groups that are capa
7 o influenza virus transmission in household, institutional, and community settings.
8 erials and Methods The study was approved by institutional animal and human studies committees.
9 mal research were surveyed to determine what institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) proc
10 hods The animal protocol was approved by the institutional animal care and use committee and the inst
11 rials and Methods This study was exempt from institutional animal care and use committee review.
12 aterials and Methods After approval from the institutional animal care and use committee, autologous
13         After approval was obtained from the institutional animal care and use committee, MR imaging
14                Materials and Methods In this Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee-approved stu
15                   Materials and Methods This institutional animal care and use committee-approved stu
16 as approved by the GE Global Research Center Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.
17 pproved by the office of biologic safety and institutional animal care and use committee.
18 and Methods All studies were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee.
19 ls and Methods The study was approved by the institutional animal care and use committee.
20 and Methods Experiments were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee.
21 s and Methods This study was approved by the institutional animal care and use committee.
22 se of Laboratory Animals and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.
23 eriments were performed with approval of the institutional animal care and use committee.
24 e study was performed with approval from the institutional animal care and use committee.
25 ere approved by the University of Washington Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.
26 Methods All experiments were approved by the institutional animal care and use committee.
27 s This prospective study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.
28 sent here a model set of recommendations for institutional animal care and use committees and institu
29 ng noncompliance policies and procedures for institutional animal care and use committees and institu
30 (n = 10) were maintained, as approved by the institutional animal care and utilization committee.
31 mber 2014, after receiving approval from the institutional animal care committee, 60 male Sprague-Daw
32  Methods The procedures were approved by the institutional animal care committee.
33                                          Our institutional approach to this lesion emphasizes early c
34  were not significantly different from local institutional AUC values (0.75 and 0.84, respectively; P
35 eement between the central reviewers and the institutional audiologist was almost perfect for ASHA an
36 ), and used permuted block sizes of four and institutional balancing.
37 rials and Methods This was a HIPAA-compliant institutional board approved multicenter study, and all
38 This retrospective study was approved by the institutional board review; written informed consent was
39 res new infrastructure that spans geography, institutional boundaries, and the divide between clinica
40                                      A multi-institutional case series of 10 patients who presented w
41   Hospital administrators are taking note of institutional CDI rates because they are publicly report
42 ve pneumococcal disease from 18 hospitals or institutional centres and retrospectively included labor
43 er CFZ and SXT susceptibilities in ED versus institutional (CFZ, 67% versus 86% [P = 0.001]; SXT, 66%
44  can facilitate students' access to positive institutional channels, giving rise to accumulative bene
45                   Demographic, surgical, and institutional characteristics and their associations wit
46                         Patient, vendor, and institutional characteristics that could be used to pred
47 ent characteristics, surgical interventions, institutional characteristics, risk factors for mortalit
48         Purpose To evaluate the effect of an institutional clinical triaging algorithm on the rate of
49  December 31, 2013) the implementation of an institutional clinical triaging algorithm.
50                               Across a multi-institutional cohort of 189 patients with ECD and ECD ov
51                                Using a multi-institutional cohort of 204 pRCC patients we assessed th
52              CDFS was assessed using a multi-institutional cohort of patients.
53                This is a retrospective multi-institutional cohort study of patients undergoing 1 of 6
54 ng interpretive performance in a large multi-institutional cohort with independent analysis of screen
55 elanoma who received adjuvant sunitinib with institutional controls.
56 FDCS; Philips HD4012LS and ACE-1), and three institutional cookstoves.
57                                         Mean institutional cost of index admissions was $67,417 and $
58                                              Institutional cost savings was estimated at $27000 per y
59                      Furthermore, a positive institutional cost savings was observed.
60 ivation, racial cleavages, civic engagement, institutional cynicism, and segregated patterns of urban
61                                        Multi-institutional data.
62                                          Our institutional database (2007-2017) was retrospectively r
63  using electronic health records and a CIEDI institutional database and identified 48 patients prescr
64             The model was populated using an institutional database containing all PDs performed 2002
65 f information from a prospectively collected institutional database was conducted at a National Cance
66 oard-approved retrospective cohort study, an institutional database was searched for abdominal and pe
67                                              Institutional databases worldwide increasingly use the W
68 nds were reversed during the epidemic: fewer institutional deliveries occurred (-240, 95% CI -293 to
69 onthly average increase of 61 (95% CI 38-84) institutional deliveries to 119 (95% CI 79-158) women ac
70 s and 149 more (95% CI 91-206; p<0.0001) had institutional deliveries.
71  care visit and >/=3 antenatal care visits), institutional delivery, and receipt of five infant vacci
72        Time-limited, early-life exposures to institutional deprivation are associated with disorders
73                        The Health Policy and Institutional Development Center at the Agence de Medeci
74  (unstable housing, stable housing, and rare institutional dwelling patterns) were identified.
75 who are neglected by caregivers or raised in institutional environments are deprived of numerous type
76            Reasons for missing PROs included institutional errors in 27 of 48 (56.3%) of the cases (e
77 als and Methods Written informed consent and institutional ethics committee approval were obtained.
78         Materials and Methods This study had institutional ethics committee approval.
79                    Materials and Methods The institutional ethics committee approved the study and wa
80                              Included in the institutional experience portion of the study were 129 p
81              We also summarize our long-term institutional experience, in which postshunt benefits in
82    Purpose To determine patient, vendor, and institutional factors that influence computed tomography
83        Models including patient, vendor, and institutional factors were good for prediction of median
84  model that incorporated the FRS and surgeon/institutional factors.
85        New links are needed between existing institutional frameworks to oversee responsible sourcing
86 diseases-trained clinicians and according to institutional guidelines.
87 oval was obtained for this prospective multi-institutional HIPAA-compliant study; written informed co
88 ant sunitinib for 6 months was compared with institutional historical controls with the same risk fac
89 ic macular clinic user interfaces within the institutional hospital information system were created.
90 ided informed consent to be included in this institutional human ethics board-approved prospective st
91 ts, which (when coupled with educational and institutional initiatives) will enable the robust stewar
92                                   We suggest institutional innovations to assess and avoid the likely
93  Methods This study was a multireader, multi-institutional, institutional review board-approved, HIPA
94 bust across different operationalizations of institutional integrity and with or without statistical
95 esidents of countries with high and moderate institutional integrity, but this correlation was not se
96 or was moderated by variations in countries' institutional integrity, defined as the degree to which
97 criminal punishment regardless of countries' institutional integrity.
98 relation was not seen for countries with low institutional integrity.
99 nducted in full accordance with the relevant institutional IRB protocol.
100  and addressing gaps in global political and institutional leadership to meet the shifting challenge.
101 lying quality improvement methodology at the institutional level can increase adherence to guidelines
102 eted at the physician, group, managerial, or institutional level on process-of-care and patient outco
103                                Further multi-institutional, longitudinal studies are required to inve
104 dose across all institutions was 11 mGy, and institutional median dose was 7-16 mGy.
105                                  We used the institutional medical database to locate these patients.
106             This retrospective review of the institutional melanoma database from the John Wayne Canc
107                                           An institutional modeling system was utilized to obtain tot
108                   Purpose To conduct a multi-institutional, multireader study to compare the performa
109 itutional animal care and use committees and institutional officials to ensure appropriate considerat
110 itutional animal care and use committees and institutional officials.
111 nd survival), and cost-effectiveness from an institutional perspective were compared for 5 testing st
112                                In this multi-institutional phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults
113                                        Multi-institutional point prevalence study.
114        Central review was then compared with institutional point-of-care interpretation.
115  computation over encrypted data, fulfilling institutional policies and regulations for protected hea
116 ses and emphasizes the need for implementing institutional policies on the judicious use and applicat
117 equential complications impacts variation in institutional postoperative mortality rates.
118 l, cross-sectional case series at a referral institutional practice in Los Angeles, California.
119 tion, cardiac resynchronization therapy, and institutional practice.
120 en their psychological effects interact with institutional processes.
121  6 months postoperatively as part of a multi-institutional, prospective study.
122  dose variation were multiphase scanning and institutional protocol choices.
123                         A prospective, multi-institutional randomized trial of SRS followed by EGFR-T
124 itations than MDs, regardless of academic or institutional rank.
125 IN 6671/GOG 0233) and to compare central and institutional reader performance.
126 change begins from within (ie, success needs institutional recognition of the importance of human beh
127 c 6, 2015, were included in an ongoing multi-institutional registry (the Harvard TMA Research Collabo
128                Prospectively collected multi-institutional registry data.
129 ging substudy; the study was approved by the institutional research board, and written informed conse
130                Materials and Methods In this institutional research ethics board-approved prospective
131              METHODS AND Data from the multi-institutional Research Patient Data Registry were used.
132                                  This was an institutional retrospective review of 74 patients with S
133 essive disorder (TRD) who participated in an Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved randomised dou
134 s and Methods This study was approved by the institutional review board and compliant with HIPAA and
135 is cross-sectional study was approved by the institutional review board and compliant with HIPAA.
136 ter, retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board and compliant with HIPAA.
137 This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board and compliant with HIPAA.
138 s and Methods This study was approved by the institutional review board and compliant with HIPAA.
139 esign and implementation were overseen by an institutional review board and conformed to HIPAA guidel
140 s The study was compliant with HIPAA and the institutional review board and required written consent
141 rk with human stem cells was approved by the institutional review board and the stem cell research ov
142     Materials and Methods The study received institutional review board approval and all patients gav
143  and Methods This prospective study received institutional review board approval and fully complied w
144              Materials and Methods Following institutional review board approval and informed consent
145                                        After institutional review board approval and informed consent
146                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval and informed consent
147         Materials and Methods This study had institutional review board approval and was HIPAA compli
148  prospective study was HIPAA compliant, with institutional review board approval and written informed
149                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval and written informed
150                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval and written informed
151                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval and written informed
152                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval and written informed
153                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval and written informed
154 ion for colorectal liver metastases, whereas institutional review board approval is required before g
155                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was given and patien
156                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained and inf
157                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained for act
158                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained for thi
159                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained for thi
160                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained for thi
161                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained for thi
162                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained for thi
163                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained from Le
164                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained with wa
165                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained, and in
166                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained, and th
167                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained, with w
168 rmed with a waiver of informed consent after institutional review board approval was obtained.
169                        Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained.
170               HISTORY: Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was waived, as the s
171 ective multicenter HIPAA-compliant study had institutional review board approval, and all participant
172         Materials and Methods This study had institutional review board approval, and informed consen
173    Materials and Methods This study received institutional review board approval, and patients gave i
174     Materials and Methods The study received institutional review board approval, and patients in the
175 s and Methods This HIPAA-compliant study had institutional review board approval, and the need for in
176 thods After obtaining antemortem consent and institutional review board approval, the authors compare
177                                         With institutional review board approval, we searched our pro
178 nd Methods This retrospective study received institutional review board approval, with a waiver of th
179              Materials and Methods Following institutional review board approval, with waiver of cons
180 s This cross-sectional study was exempt from institutional review board approval.
181 n's prospective database were evaluated with institutional review board approval.
182 iant retrospective study was completed after institutional review board approval.
183 als and Methods This retrospective study had institutional review board approval; written informed co
184         Materials and Methods This study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant.
185                    Materials and Methods The institutional review board approved the study.
186                    Materials and Methods The institutional review board approved this cross-sectional
187              Materials and Methods The local institutional review board approved this HIPAA-compliant
188                    Materials and Methods The institutional review board approved this retrospective c
189                     Materials and Methods An institutional review board approved this retrospective s
190                    Materials and Methods The institutional review board approved this retrospective s
191                    Materials and Methods The institutional review board approved this study.
192                                           An institutional review board exemption and a waiver for in
193                                              Institutional review board exemptions were granted prior
194 s approval was obtained from the centralized institutional review board for this prospective single-a
195 ns from OLT patients were collected under an institutional review board protocol 2 hours after portal
196                        After approval by the institutional review board, 1,022 LNs in the PET/CT exam
197 s and Methods This study was approved by the institutional review board, and all participants gave wr
198 This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and informed consent was wai
199 This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and the requirement to obtai
200 s and Methods This study was approved by the institutional review board, and written informed consent
201 xempt from review by the Columbia University Institutional Review Board, Protocol ID# AAAO3003.
202  study that were exempted from review by the institutional review board, which consisted of 1007 post
203             Materials and Methods This is an institutional review board- and U.S. Food and Drug Admin
204 rials and Methods This prospective study was institutional review board- approved and HIPAA compliant
205            Materials and Methods This was an institutional review board-approved and HIPAA-compliant
206                Materials and Methods In this institutional review board-approved and HIPAA-compliant
207               Materials and Methods For this institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retr
208                Materials and Methods In this institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retr
209                Materials and Methods In this institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant retr
210 agnosed HL (n = 19) and NHL (n = 2) onto the Institutional Review Board-approved investigation of (11
211 erials and Methods For this HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved prospective blinded
212 ce of distant metastases were enrolled in an institutional review board-approved prospective clinical
213            Materials and Methods This was an institutional review board-approved prospective study in
214                Materials and Methods In this institutional review board-approved prospective study, 2
215 terials and Methods In this HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective cohort
216                     Materials and Methods An institutional review board-approved retrospective review
217                Materials and Methods In this institutional review board-approved retrospective review
218  Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective study
219  Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective study
220   Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved retrospective study
221                   Materials and Methods This institutional review board-approved retrospective study,
222            Materials and Methods This was an institutional review board-approved retrospective study,
223                                      In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study,
224  from November 2010 to October 2012 for this institutional review board-approved study after they pro
225                                         This institutional review board-approved study from June 2007
226                   Materials and Methods This institutional review board-approved study included 125 w
227     Materials and Methods This retrospective institutional review board-approved study included 24 pa
228  Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study measured the p
229 d Methods This retrospective HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved study was exempt fro
230  Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study was performed
231              A prospective, HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study was performed
232 Materials and Methods In this retrospective, institutional review board-approved study, 120 patients
233 hods In this retrospective, HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study, 136 consecuti
234 Materials and Methods In this retrospective, institutional review board-approved study, 33 patients w
235 Materials and Methods In this retrospective, institutional review board-approved study, 41 pediatric
236 rials and Methods This was a HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved study, with informed
237 astases were included in this retrospective, institutional review board-approved study.
238 ng with concomitant CT were enrolled in this institutional review board-approved study.
239  informed consent prior to inclusion in this institutional review board-approved study.
240 ening were compared in this HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study.
241 d patients provided informed consent in this institutional review board-approved study.
242    Materials and Methods In this binational, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant pro
243 tudy was a multireader, multi-institutional, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant ret
244                   Materials and Methods This institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant ret
245                   Materials and Methods This institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant stu
246 erials and Methods This was a retrospective, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant stu
247                Materials and Methods In this institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant stu
248                                        In an institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant, pr
249                   Materials and Methods This institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant, re
250                   Materials and Methods This institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant, re
251            Materials and Methods This was an institutional review board-approved, prospectively condu
252          Materials and Methods SIESTA was an institutional review board-approved, single-center, pros
253 ed by the local animal studies committee and institutional review board.
254 ve HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board.
255 r, HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board.
256 aining written consent under approval of the institutional review board.
257 nter retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board.
258 ctive case-control study was approved by the institutional review board.
259 This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board.
260 s This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board.
261 ere compliant with HIPAA and approved by the institutional review board.
262 nd HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board.
263 ls and Methods The study was approved by the institutional review board.
264  the protocol was approved by the university institutional review board.
265 is HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board.
266 tional animal care and use committee and the institutional review board.
267 s and Methods This study was approved by the institutional review board.
268 iant retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board; the requirement to obtain in
269 andards in the ethical review of research by institutional review boards (IRBs) due to the rush to en
270 a sharing, establishing common protocols for institutional review boards and data sharing, creating p
271         Materials and Methods The respective institutional review boards approved this HIPAA-complian
272           Materials and Methods The relevant institutional review boards approved this HIPAA-complian
273                    Materials and Methods The institutional review boards of each center approved this
274                    Materials and Methods The institutional review boards of the four participating ce
275 priate ICU-based research, investigators and Institutional Review Boards should consider a deferred c
276 ve cross-sectional study was approved by the institutional review boards, and all participants gave i
277                         By comparison, local institutional review demonstrated sensitivity, specifici
278                     This was a retrospective institutional review of 433 oncology patients (203 men;
279 (UCSF), has undergone 3 substantial changes: institutional salary support goes preferentially to seni
280       Lactate testing is prepopulated in the institutional sepsis order set but may be canceled at cl
281                                              Institutional setting.
282 ppropriate or inappropriate often applied in institutional settings, fails to account for complex fac
283                                Patient size, institutional-specific protocols, and multiphase scannin
284                                         This institutional study included 27 eyes of 23 patients (age
285                                       Single-institutional study.
286                                          The institutional subcommittee for research animal care appr
287                         Personal motivation, institutional support, and collaborators continued to be
288 ity by trimming down their consumption or by institutional support.
289 nal/surgeon volumes, and various measures of institutional surgeon team experience.
290 ored the effects of patient characteristics, institutional/surgeon volumes, and various measures of i
291                      The association between institutional TAVR volume and the 30-day readmission met
292                                     However, institutional testing activities in sub-Saharan Africa a
293 l and external validity with a retrospective institutional validation sample (2013 and 2014).
294 hat incorporated clinician preference-based, institutional variation in NSAID treatment frequency to
295 chia coli antibiograms were compared between institutional versus ED and among ED patients (male vers
296  and lower quartiles of travel distance with institutional volume established short travel/low-volume
297 dence interval, 1.51-3.18; P<0.001), and low institutional volume of BAV (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confi
298 body mass index-for-age percentile and lower institutional volume of TGA repair.
299               Neither surgeon experience nor institutional volume significantly predicted mortality;
300                                       Higher institutional volume was associated with lower cost of p

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