ライフサイエンスコーパス: negativity

1 cognitive control (i.e., stimulus preceding negativity).

2 tive appraisal of outcomes (feedback-related negativity).

3 sion-free survival in patients achieving MRD negativity.

4 derived that determined nodal positivity or negativity.

5 ous other community preferences unrelated to negativity.

6 rrant full-thickness CK17 positivity and CK7 negativity.

7 ca because of the protective effect of Duffy negativity.

8 tients who are defined as having imaging MRD negativity.

9 cal to the primary diagnosis except for CD19 negativity.

10 responded achieved minimal residual disease negativity.

11 d potentials (LF-ERPs), such as the mismatch negativity.

12 d blood-culture positivity, or blood-culture negativity.

13 All cases showed p53 immuno-negativity.

14 itive as collaterally determined by mRNA ISH negativity.

15 34 patients (76%, 95% CI 62-89) achieved PET-negativity.

16 day 5 viral RNA (44.7% vs 40.2%) or culture negativity (100.0% vs 98.1%), RNA decline rate, and dura

17 ensitive to faces) and a posterior-occipital negativity~230 to 280 ms (early posterior negativity-EPN

18 ependent predictive factor affecting HCV RNA negativity 6 months after liver transplantation (OR:11.2

19 ssion-free survival (45%) compared with PET2 negativity (81%, P < 0.002), DeltaSUVmax (>71 vs </=71%)

20 gher HR for developing MS compared to double negativity (95% CI = 12.26-58.74, p < 0.001).

21 ze (mean, 11.7 vs 15.3 mm; P = .15) and node negativity (98% vs 91%, P = .28).

22 rning from mistakes (i.e., the error-related negativity), a putative index of prediction error signal

23 Likewise, error-related negativity, a marker for error processing, was greater i

24 ion between hexokinase-2 expression and this negativity: a finding which may also be relevant for cli

25 The results suggest that negativity accompanies the relevance of the faces (femal

26 ion as reflected by reduced feedback-related negativity (ADHD, 0.61 [3.90] muV; controls, -1.68 [2.52

27 Additionally, an increased frontal negativity along with a decreased late positive potentia

28 Mismatch negativity amplitude (F = 4.39, P = .04) and glutamate (

29 The well characterized mismatch negativity, an electrophysiological response that indexe

30 asured the amplitude of the feedback-related negativity, an event-related brain potential associated

31 In striking contrast, the feedback-related negativity, an event-related potential component thought

32 characterized by an early (200 ms) posterior negativity and a later (>300 ms) parietal positivity in

33 formance through increasing membrane surface negativity and decreasing the formation of a fouling lay

34 The feedback-related negativity and error-related negativity-hypothesized to

35 specific survival (DSS) and, except for CD30 negativity and folliculotropic MF, also overall survival

36 The early posterior negativity and late positive potential were greatest in

37 st-person perspective enhanced error-related negativity and medial-frontal theta power in the trials

38 The mismatch negativity and P300 components of the auditory event-rel

39 Mismatch negativity and P3a were measured in 30 UHR individuals,

40 ing (N2) and error processing (error-related negativity and positivity) from an arrow flanker task wi

41 LFP electrodes, and the magnitude of the STA negativity and the distance over which it was observed d

42 Both the nature of negativity and the liberal-conservative opposition are a

43 nly in frontal regions, an auditory mismatch negativity, and a visual mismatch response.

44 Group performance status of 2 or lower, HIV negativity, and absence of comorbidity disallowing proto

45 rs, reaction time variability, error-related negativity, and error-related positivity (all p </= .05)

46 cular disease, diabetes, SCCmec type II, PVL negativity, and higher vancomycin MIC (all P values were

47 an epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negativity, and histologic grade 1 in luminal A tumors.

48 t the idea that MCL with mutated IGHV, SOX11-negativity, and nonnodal presentation correspond to a su

49 refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma achieving PET-negativity, and therefore could optimise the chance of c

50 y are characterized by CD44 positivity, CD24 negativity, and/or ALDH1 positivity in flow cytometric s

51 ssayed by 3,3'-dihexyloxacarbocyanine iodine negativity, annexin positivity, and poly (adenosine 5'-d

52 stance, and a low-frequency rhythm with peak negativity approximately 25 ms after the spike that atte

53 bsequent ERP component, the visual awareness negativity ( approximately 260-300 ms), were absent duri

54 e probe-locked ERPs suggest that the frontal negativity (approximately 500ms) reflects the final reso

55 BRCA1 status and ER negativity are independently associated with higher pCR

56 ly those classically termed feedback-related negativity, are modulated by both the reward level and s

57 Error-related and correct-related negativity as electrophysiological indicators of perform

58 ng a multivariate survival analysis with HPV negativity as the reference group, CxCaRNA(+) as a singl

59 olecular features, such as estrogen receptor negativity as well as HER2-enriched and basal-like PAM50

60 idates (150-250 ms) was found, followed by a negativity associated with lexical selection (350-450 ms

61 broth can predict the probability of culture negativity at defined time points.

62 at parietal sites (approximately 260ms) and negativity at frontal sites (approximately 420ms).

63 to establish the exposure necessary for GMI negativity at the end of therapy.

64 g10 copies/mL at Week 24 with maintained PCR negativity at Years 2-4 and a lack of resistance at Year

65 and impact on minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity because this end point has been associated wi

66 A, or SPCN (sustained parietal contralateral negativity), before and after the stimulation such that

67 nterconvert cutoffs for Abeta positivity and negativity between the 2 radioligands, and these cutoffs

68 rse karyotypes, and, in the case of FLT3-ITD negativity, biallelic versus monoallelic/homozygous CEBP

69 into account both individual differences in negativity bias and differences in empathic concern.

70 nditional nature of the relationship between negativity bias and ideology by arguing that the politic

71 he analysis of individual differences in the negativity bias and political ideology.

72 suggest that relations between ideology and negativity bias are linear.

73 We argue that the political effects of negativity bias are narrower than Hibbing et al. suggest

74 In our target article we argued that negativity bias can explain a surprisingly large share o

75 Value conflicts that represent negativity bias clarify differences between what worries

76 ess reactivity is associated with a stronger negativity bias during ambiguous affective decision-maki

77 Negativity bias explains many ideological differences, y

78 The commentators generally support the negativity bias hypothesis but suggest theoretical and e

79 Thus the role of negativity bias in broad ideological conflict depends on

80 The negativity bias in human cognition emerges in infancy an

81 Recent work has questioned whether the negativity bias is a distinct component of affective pic

82 hat the difference across individuals in the negativity bias is a key factor in determining political

83 Negativity bias may underlie the development of politica

84 Negativity bias reliably predicts social, but not econom

85 logy by arguing that the political impact of negativity bias should vary as a function of (1) issue d

86 riers in three behavioral domains, that is, 'negativity bias' (negative valence), 'apathy' (arousal)

87 ferences points not to global differences in negativity bias, but to differences in threat bias, prob

88 There is an extensive literature on the negativity bias, including its conceptualization, measur

89 in are those likely to reflect the degree of negativity bias.

90 le psychological factor, namely, strength of negativity bias.

91 s may be rooted in individual differences in negativity bias.

92 dict one major prediction from the authors' "negativity-bias" model.

93 mportance of genetic and cultural factors on negativity biases.

94 itivity was associated with hormone receptor negativity (chi(2) P < .001) and nodal positivity (chi(2

95 those who achieved CSF cryptococcal culture negativity compared to those with positive cultures pre-

96 y enhanced error-related and correct-related negativity compared with healthy comparison subjects.

97 Previous studies have identified an early negativity component (N(inc)) as a prominent marker of S

98 ude of the sustained posterior contralateral negativity component (SPCN, 300-400 ms) decreased, indic

99 and later reward-sensitive (feedback-related negativity) components.

100 propose a framework based on alternating non-negativity-constrained least squares which accounts for

101 Without the non-negativity constraint, the output converges to a square

102 Non-negativity constraints on the calcium concentration can

103 MRD negativity correlated with both progression-free surviva

104 including nuclear hormone receptor and HER2 negativity, cytokeratin 5/6 and vimentin expression, and

105 Minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, defined as <1 chronic lymphocytic leukemia (

106 Mismatch negativity did not significantly differentiate ESZ and C

107 ted potential component (the early posterior negativity) did not show these results, indicating speci

108 "Culture negativity" does not seem to be due to failure of growth

109 oencephalographic recordings of the mismatch negativity elicited in a large cohort of human subjects,

110 lection is the N2pc, a lateralized posterior negativity emerging around 180-200 ms.

111 mans have established larger early posterior negativity (EPN) in response to pictures depicting snake

112 with the P2 and encompassing early posterior negativity (EPN), P3, and the late positive potential (L

113 al negativity~230 to 280 ms (early posterior negativity-EPN).

114 itch deviants evoked an early right anterior negativity (ERAN) in both groups.

115 ssing and coupling between the error-related negativity (ERN) and consecutive behavioural slowing.

116 The error-related negativity (ERN) and error-related functional MRI (fMRI)

117 The error-related negativity (ERN) and positivity (Pe) are components of e

118 es of error processing, namely error-related negativity (ERN) and positivity.

119 in the generation of both the error-related negativity (ERN) and the novelty-related frontocentral N

120 monitoring, as measured by the error-related negativity (ERN) in the event-related potential, is a re

121 areness studies found that the error-related negativity (ERN), an event-related potential (ERP) origi

122 a is associated with a blunted error-related negativity (ERN), indicating a deficit in error monitori

123 monitoring, as measured by the error-related negativity (ERN), is a transdiagnostic neurobiological m

124 lus-locked P2, response-locked error-related negativity (ERN/Ne), and response-locked error positivit

125 etection (the latter indexed by the mismatch negativity event-related potential) relies on probabilit

126 The feedback- or error-related negativity (FN) has been extensively documented in front

127 we studied as a measure of RPE the feedback negativity (FN) that is sensitive to both reward and the

128 vent-related potential, the feedback-related negativity (FN), is evoked over the ACC whenever expecta

129 h only skin lesions at the time of LCT, CD30 negativity, folliculotropic MF and extent of skin lesion

130 analysis of the total group showed that CD30 negativity, folliculotropic MF, extent of skin lesions a

131 n overt PMF (7.2 vs 17.6 years), with triple negativity for driver mutations and presence of HMR muta

132 ositivity for vascular endothelium and D2-40 negativity for lymphatic endothelium.

133 An enhanced negativity for the /pt/ cluster relative to its contrast

134 ked ERPs showed an enhanced Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN) and P300 for losses compared to wins as

135 and a neural modulation of feedback-related negativity (FRN) and stimulus-preceding negativity (SPN)

136 justment: the frontocentral feedback-related negativity (FRN) and two P300 (P3) subcomponents, the fr

137 Modulations of the feedback-related negativity (FRN) event-related potential (ERP) have been

138 data demonstrated a larger feedback-related negativity (FRN) in response to money loss during risk t

139 The feedback-related negativity (FRN) is a commonly observed potential in sca

140 The feedback-related negativity (FRN) is a neural response that in part refle

141 oss were measured using the feedback-related negativity (FRN), a component implicated in motivational

142 contingencies modulated the Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN), a human brain potential known to index

143 ents, including the P2, the feedback-related negativity (FRN), and the late positive component (LPC),

144 eration of this ERP and the feedback-related negativity (FRN), often assumed to reflect reward-predic

145 ll studied in humans is the feedback-related negativity (FRN), which is assumed to indicate activatio

146 N1), motivational salience (feedback-related negativities [FRN]), and cognitive appraisal (P300) stag

147 uditory-evoked potential (AEP), the mismatch negativity, generated in the auditory cortex 100-200 ms

148 ensory measures, including impaired mismatch negativity generation (r=0.62, N=51, p=0.0002).

149 ency response (P < 0.05); and (iii) mismatch negativity generation to trained versus untrained tones

150 r most of the history of prejudice research, negativity has been treated as its emotional and cogniti

151 Multivariate analysis identified that HPV negativity (hazard ratio [HR], 2.9; 95% CI, 2.0 to 5.0),

152 tor receptor 2 positivity, estrogen receptor negativity, high tumor grade, and large tumor size.

153 eedback-related negativity and error-related negativity-hypothesized to reflect activation in the ant

154 A genome-wide analysis of TST negativity identified a significant linkage signal (P <

155 teractions and is unambiguously indicated by negativities in the phase-space quasi-probability distri

156 We detected ASS1 negativity in 40% of bladder cancers, in which multivari

157 was to describe the proportion of PET false-negativity in a representative set of 227 newly diagnose

158 The hazard ratios for the time to culture negativity in both solid and liquid mediums for the ison

159 tolerable and demonstrates high rates of MRD negativity in NDMM, translating into longer progression-

160 They were concordant with IED surface negativity in seven of eight patients (0.88; 95% confide

161 The time to virus negativity in stool was determined.

162 ivity in hERG K(+) channel blockage testing, negativity in the Ames test, and 5/5 cure @ <15 mpk x 3

163 monitoring, as measured by the error-related negativity in the event-related brain potential, represe

164 es elicited a larger frontocentral sustained negativity in the evoked potential as well as enhanced p

165 t for full-thickness CK14 positivity and CK7 negativity in the lesion.

166 utions from two distinct sources-a transient negativity in the LFP locked to the spike ( approximatel

167 ss, viewers perceived illusory positivity or negativity in the nondiagnostic faces when seen with bod

168 collapse were closely associated with smear negativity in this age group.

169 decisions), but not posterior contralateral negativity (indexing focal-attentional selection), compo

170 The EFS hazard ratio (HR) for achieving MRD negativity is 0.23 (95% Bayesian credible interval [BCI]

171 The mismatch negativity is a potential biomarker of schizophrenia and

172 lantation (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET-negativity is one of the strongest predictors of outcome

173 In this mouse model, Nkx2-1 negativity is pathognomonic of high-grade poorly differe

174 The value of having achieved MRD negativity is substantial in both pediatric and adult pa

175 ndex of cognitive control, the error-related negativity, is investigated to examine its suitability a

176 er agreement errors elicited a left anterior negativity (LAN) regardless of the distance between (dis

177 decrease in ERP amplitude of a late frontal negativity (LFN) elicited by the isolated word.

178 with ANA positivity (>/=20 units), anti-MCV negativity (</=70 units), and elevated levels of both EC

179 In our case, the HMB-45 negativity may be explained by the rarity of the epithel

180 task relevant items, whereas the subsequent negativity may reflect inhibition of no-longer-relevant

181 A reduced error-related negativity measured during the first week of treatment w

182 d that the amplitude of the feedback-related negativity, measured as the difference wave in the event

183 nt-related potential studies as the mismatch negativity (MMN) and has been observed in several sensor

184 Auditory mismatch negativity (MMN) and P300 event-related potentials (ERPs

185 in, the focus is on sensory gating, mismatch negativity (MMN) and P300, thereby discussing which para

186 For example, the mismatch negativity (MMN) and P3a event-related potentials (ERPs)

187 ed event-related potential known as mismatch negativity (MMN) and provides a potential link between n

188 Mismatch negativity (MMN) and visual P1 are established event-rel

189 change responses, as indexed by the mismatch negativity (MMN) component of the auditory event-related

190 Here, we examined the mismatch negativity (MMN) component of the event-related potentia

191 The mismatch negativity (MMN) component of the human event-related po

192 This response resembled the mismatch negativity (MMN) evoked by surprising or unlikely events

193 icits in the generation of auditory mismatch negativity (MMN) generation are among the most widely re

194 processing: prepulse inhibition and mismatch negativity (MMN) in SZ patients and healthy subjects (HS

195 Mismatch negativity (MMN) indexes pre-attentive information proce

196 Auditory mismatch negativity (MMN) is a biomarker for schizophrenia though

197 The mismatch negativity (MMN) is a brain event-related potential mark

198 The mismatch negativity (MMN) is a preattentive component of the audi

199 Mismatch negativity (MMN) is an auditory event-related potential

200 The mismatch negativity (MMN) is an event related potential evoked by

201 The observation that mismatch negativity (MMN) is consistently impaired in schizophren

202 The mismatch negativity (MMN) is thought to index the activation of s

203 n elicit an electroencephalographic mismatch negativity (MMN) response.

204 ately 200 ms, with the multisensory mismatch negativity (MMN) significantly different from the sum of

205 Mismatch negativity (MMN) to FM tones was assessed in 43 patients

206 ssociated the two systems using the mismatch negativity (MMN), a well studied EEG effect evoked by ac

207 was conducted to determine whether mismatch negativity (MMN), an event-related potential index of au

208 Mismatch negativity (MMN), an evoked potential calculated by subt

209 had developed PTSD showed enhanced mismatch negativity (MMN), increased theta power (5-7 Hz), and st

210 asure of auditory change detection, mismatch negativity (MMN), is one of the most consistent findings

211 signatures of neurodynamics, namely mismatch negativity (MMN), P300, and contingent negative variatio

212 d an automatic brain potential, the mismatch negativity (MMN), when listeners did not attend to the a

213 paradigms were presented to derive mismatch negativity (MMN), which reflects the ability to automati

214 tes evoked responses--including the mismatch negativity (MMN).

215 e-head electrical recordings of the mismatch negativity (MMN).

216 ctroencephalogram (EEG) paradigm of mismatch negativity (MMN).

217 se inhibition (PPI) of startle) and mismatch negativity (MMN).

218 of MFC activity on errors, the error-related negativity (Ne/ERN), in a task in which two types of err

219 Overall, 68% of patients achieved MRD negativity; none of these patients relapsed.

220 We suggest that reduction in charge negativity of MWNT-antigen conjugate enhances cellular u

221 tive ventures)-was reflected in an increased negativity of N170 amplitude over the right hemisphere.

222 f OA and WEA was based on the positivity and negativity of results on specific inhalation challenges,

223 The feedback-related negativity of the event-related potential, which is comm

224 (20-30 Hz) frequencies and fired at the peak negativity of the field oscillation.

225 For three clinical specimens, false negativity of the gold standard assay could not be exclu

226 the observation that the latency of the peak negativity of the spike-triggered LFP average (STA) incr

227 s because they (1) are uncorrelated with the negativity of the stimuli being considered, (2) do not r

228 atures and directly account for both the non-negativity of the underlying spectra and dependencies at

229 ) is limited due to high-dimensionality, non-negativity of the underlying spectra and dependencies at

230 However, OPT should be performed in case of negativity on skin tests.

231 definition of these cells that also includes negativity or low level of expression of CD127.

232 5 to 6.42; P = .002), estrogen receptor (ER) negativity (OR = 1.96; 95% CI:1.05 to 3.65; P = .03) and

233 was associated with older age, smoking, node negativity, or prior thromboembolic event.

234 ixtures (all P < .001), hepatitis C antibody negativity (P = .05), and black race/ethnicity (P = .02)

235 ency (p = .644), Infrequency (p = .097), and Negativity (p = .456) were not statistically significant

236 Main Outcome and Measures: Mismatch negativity, P3a, and reorienting negativity were used to

237 Simulations of a mismatch negativity paradigm predicted a rapid trial-by-trial sup

238 ly rare (e.g., in oddball blocks of mismatch negativity paradigms, or in repetition suppression parad

239 s of processing: the posterior contralateral negativity (PCN) was used to index focal-attentional sel

240 ested that there is a connection between TST negativity per se and TNF production.

241 le, that controls tuberculin skin test (TST) negativity per se, that is, T-cell-independent resistanc

242 iological signatures: an early left anterior negativity post code switch onset - a LAN - followed by

243 50.7% of patients with IGHV-M achieved MRD-negativity posttreatment; of these, PFS was 79.8% at 12.

244 stimulation eliciting the cortical mismatch negativity potential demonstrate deficits in early senso

245 w effect), as well as a sustained widespread negativity, potentially indicative of memory searches fo

246 Conversion to PCR negativity predicted better progression-free survival (P

247 iveness such as high grade, hormone receptor negativity, presence of a basal-like or TNBC phenotype a

248 d interferon alpha (PEG-IFNa) showed HDV RNA negativity rates of 25-30% 24 weeks after therapy.

249 demonstrated superior circumferential margin negativity rates with LP compared with OP (odds ratio 1.

250 intracortical homolog of the "object-related negativity" recorded noninvasively in humans, which corr

251 trate the long-term benefit of achieving MRD negativity, regardless of the therapeutic setting and tr

252 None of the patients who achieved MRD negativity relapsed.

253 t that there was also a unique contralateral negativity related to the process of monitoring target p

254 04 and 0.8 +/- 0.03 for nodal positivity and negativity, respectively).

255 ing with their full-thickness positivity and negativity, respectively, in normal conjunctival epithel

256 Patients showed impaired mismatch negativity response to emotionally relevant frequency mo

257 d index of auditory perception, the mismatch negativity response, tested whether the therapies altere

258 EEG recordings revealed that mismatch negativity responses were larger for timing deviants of

259 , while bipolar probands scored higher on a "negativity" scale compared with their co-twins and contr

260 MRD negativity should be considered as one of the most relev

261 tch response for the pitch deviants (i.e., a negativity) showed a mismatch response to the rule devia

262 Furthermore, MRD negativity significantly improved TTP of patients >75 ye

263 uted multivoxel pattern reflecting affective negativity) simulated the presumed affective state of th

264 Double positivity/double negativity/single positivity to rApi m 1 and rVes v 5 wa

265 ated negativity (FRN) and stimulus-preceding negativity (SPN) following outcome value modulation.

266 ing sequences of unmodulated tones (mismatch negativity; stimulus-specific adaptation).

267 atial and temporal features as error-related negativity, the electrophysiological correlate of perfor

268 Mismatch negativity to auditory deviants (duration, frequency, an

269 We found the incidence of PET false-negativity to be 11%.

270 obesity was associated with weaker implicit negativity toward overweight people compared to thin peo

271 besity was associated with stronger implicit negativity toward overweight people compared to thin peo

272 f personal obesity is associated with weaker negativity toward overweight people on both explicit (i.

273 ess by which early individual differences in negativity unfold and are shaped by both genes and envir

274 genetics, with prognostic superiority of MRD negativity versus CR particularly evident in patients wi

275 uthors connect conservatism with aversion to negativity via the tendentious use of the language of th

276 erse-transcription polymerase chain reaction negativity was 46.4 days after symptom onset (95% confid

277 th resistant virus, the median time to virus negativity was 5.5 days in pocapavir recipients, compare

278 cordance between clinical response and F-PET negativity was 97% because of 2 false positive.

279 Moreover, the error-related negativity was a stronger predictor of recent cocaine us

280 ANCA negativity was associated with a decreased proportion of

281 ANCA negativity was associated with an increased proportion o

282 in the word-matching task, while a parietal negativity was elicited by semantically unrelated primes

283 eving at least a near-complete response, MRD negativity was found in 28 of 28 (100% [95% CI, 88%-100%

284 The error-related negativity was measured in 57 cocaine-dependent patients

285 omplete remission (CR) in the absence of MRD negativity was not associated with prolonged progression

286 Mismatch negativity was reduced to both duration deviants not onl

287 PET positivity or negativity was related to progression-free survival (PFS

288 The greatest impact of achieving MRD negativity was seen in patients receiving frontline trea

289 The error-related negativity was the only significant predictor in the mod

290 Mismatch negativity was used as a functional read-out of auditory

291 f valence bias, is associated with increased negativity, we tested how individual differences in acut

292 ermined that psoriasis and rheumatoid factor negativity were the most important features that differe

293 s: Mismatch negativity, P3a, and reorienting negativity were used to measure EAP.

294 ral evoked response similar to error-related negativity, which has in turn been implicated in general

295 MFC-MRD negativity, which was achieved in 51% of patients after

296 ne the predictive value of the error-related negativity while controlling for addiction severity and

297 We identified a frontocentral negativity whose amplitude was modulated by the size of

298 y ClonoSeq achieved minimal residual disease negativity with CLL <1/10 000 white blood cells, which p

299 CHB patients with HVL can achieve HBV DNA negativity with long-term TDF treatment, although time t

300 ponse categories of minimal residual disease negativity, with or without imaging-based absence of ext