ライフサイエンスコーパス: outcome research

1 ncreasingly important in clinical trials and outcome research.

2 cts affect the generalizability of treatment outcome research.

3 nd of PTSD, and gold standards for treatment outcome research.

4 riable of interest in traumatic brain injury outcome research.

5 ry roles of randomized controlled trials and outcome research.

6 s of visual disability for use in ophthalmic outcomes research.

7 evaluating clinical programs or for clinical outcomes research.

8 nitalia is lending direction to longitudinal outcomes research.

9 deline development, medical informatics, and outcomes research.

10 nd a vision for the future of cardiovascular outcomes research.

11 -stage investigators committed to careers in outcomes research.

12 to anyone with an interest in atopic eczema outcomes research.

13 provement programs, and peer-reviewed health outcomes research.

14 rofessional group dedicated to atopic eczema outcomes research.

15 s and to prioritize topics for atopic eczema outcomes research.

16 y in clinical practice, clinical trials, and outcomes research.

17 dvance collaborative high-yield, high-impact outcomes research; (2) identify priorities and barriers

18 ronmental chemicals for obesity and diabetes outcomes research: a screening approach using ToxCast hi

19 ding an examination of the recent history of outcomes research, an evaluation of the current academic

20 e of exclusion criteria in alcohol treatment outcome research and its effects on the comparability of

21 QOL research is an important element of outcomes research and can provide an important adjunct t

22 s, and Actions in Coronary Events Center for Outcomes Research and Education (TRACE-CORE) aims to adv

23 These findings have implications for TBI outcomes research and for protocols and research selecti

24 CER incorporates many attributes of outcomes research and health services research, while pl

25 ds This study used data from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) consortium.

26 93 patients participating in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study (a na

27 ng or colorectal cancer from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study were

28 ed survey of participants in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS)

29 , and prospective cohort studies Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS)

30 ve, observational study from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium from five

31 tion-based cohort studied by the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium, and we ab

32 cancer who were enrolled in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance study (a multiregiona

33 lung or colorectal cancer in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance study (a multiregiona

34 Patients participating in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance study were interviewe

35 e research, translational research, clinical outcomes research, and even in prevention/control resear

36 quelae of childhood asthma, patient-centered outcomes research, and precision medicine.

37 ies and barriers to important cardiovascular outcomes research; and (3) define future needs for the f

38 tions with individuals who have expertise in outcomes research; and (5) expansion of opportunities to

39 New techniques from the business and outcomes research arenas allow for the development of qu

40 iction, however, should be validated through outcomes research before it is widely propagated.

41 s a significant investment in cardiovascular outcomes research by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood

42 hould be conducted so that alcohol treatment outcome research can be better generalized to vulnerable

43 The Centers for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (CCORs) held a meeting to review how c

44 om the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research clinical registry.

45 Cumulative experience and ongoing outcomes research continue to substantiate the safety an

46 concluded that a dedicated investment in CV outcomes research could directly improve the care delive

47 The National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research database was used to identify adult ca

48 e obtained from the Cardinal Health Clinical Outcomes Research Database, a large population-based dat

49 Retrospective review of Cardinal Health Outcomes Research Database, which comprises all acute ca

50 prevention and treatment interventions, and outcomes research for patients and families.

51 held a meeting to review how cardiovascular outcomes research had evolved in the decade since the Na

52 In more recent times, outcome research has given us further information that r

53 However, asthma outcomes research has almost invariably concentrated on

54 Recent clinical outcomes research has examined the impact of blood trans

55 Many advances in outcomes research have been pioneered in transplantation

56 To facilitate comparative clinical outcome research in low vision rehabilitation, we must u

57 group of patients should be based on ongoing outcome research in this field.

58 Blood Institute convened a working group on outcomes research in cardiovascular disease (CVD).

59 The Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI) receives endoscopy r

60 oscopy and pathology reports to the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative repository.

61 etScan; Medicare; Medicaid; and the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative's National Endoscopic Datab

62 The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) has established dist

63 und of merit review for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) in November 2012 inc

64 and Affordable Care Act, a Patient-centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) was established to a

65 nto law in 2010 created the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which includes an i

66 zed research agenda for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute as informed by a diverse gro

67 The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute is funding 8 comparative eff

68 The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute offers substantial funding t

69 The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute tasked the Duke Evidence Syn

70 matic clinical trial by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute's National Patient-Centered

71 s article will describe the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded asthma projects and h

72 ess Research (PROSPER) is a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded research program desi

73 anagement developed for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

74 (5) expansion of opportunities to train new outcomes research investigators.

75 Outcome research is deeply rooted in epidemiology, inclu

76 Outcomes research is a rapidly evolving field that incor

77 A frequent challenge in outcomes research is the comparison of rates from differ

78 For the purposes of this document, "outcomes research" is defined as investigative endeavors

79 mized studies (a term that is preferable to "outcomes research") is in the allocation of patients to

80 rinciples of QOL research are similar to all outcomes research methods.

81 Despite the increasing interest in outcomes research, methods to develop COSs have not yet

82 and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research (NAVIGATOR), 9306 research participant

83 practice, and is central to patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR).

84 zable, and are essential in patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR).

85 h established the Centers for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program in 2010.

86 The Centers for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program represents a significant inves

87 ry interventions to design successful health outcomes research programs.

88 Lastly, outcome research provides encouraging preliminary eviden

89 Conventional outcomes research provides only percentage risk of such

90 ng a database to address health services and outcomes research questions in critical care, examines s

91 o provide guidance on research priorities in outcomes research related to CVD.

92 ion criteria can result in alcohol treatment outcome research samples that are more heavily composed

93 ptimal care, further program development and outcomes research should target these bundle components

94 govern the conduct of burden-of-illness and outcomes research studies involving collaborations betwe

95 andomized trials, the Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research Study (VIGOR; 8076 patients) and the C

96 nts and outpatients in the Pneumonia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) cohort study.

97 heir use conforms with Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) recommendations for adjunc

98 graphically confirmed pneumonia of Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class II, III, or IV

99 y trial, adult Asian patients with Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class III-IV acute co

100 n was assessed using SMART-COP and Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) scoring systems.

101 nity-acquired bacterial pneumonia (Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team [PORT] class II-IV) were randomiz

102 9) receive ICU care in the Pneumonia Patient Outcomes Research Team prospective cohort.

103 were adherence to the Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team treatment recommendations from in

104 te measure of staffing for nursing-sensitive outcomes research than administrative measures, as it re

105 tion to studies that use exclusion criteria, outcome research that uses no or minimal exclusion crite

106 factors, impact on cardiovascular outcomes, outcomes research that is currently in progress, and are

107 s of anger and aggression along with service outcome research, the criminal justice system, and a rou

108 keholders and a research team experienced in outcomes research, the scope and setting of the core set

109 nonmedical factors, and growing attention to outcomes research, there is increasing interest in the e

110 representatives from governmental agencies, outcomes research thought leaders, and public and privat

111 or anemia and hyperparathyroidism), although outcome research to support some of our current guidelin

112 orkgroup summary examines the suitability of outcomes research to complement results of randomized co

113 iews, evidence-quality appraisal, and health outcomes research to provide a methodologic framework fo

114 Recognizing the value of outcomes research to understand and bridge translational

115 th lumbar disk herniation, the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) randomized trial intent-

116 The SPORT (Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial) reported favorable surgery outc

117 GN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial, a randomized clinical trial enr

118 ion cases of subjects from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial.

119 al study of persons in Collaborations in HIV Outcomes Research/US cohort who initiated their first HA

120 Outcomes research utilizing evidence-based approaches ar

121 egulatory agencies generally do not consider outcomes research when assessing efficacy of new drugs o

122 ulatory and reimbursement authorities to use outcomes research when making efficacy, effectiveness, a

123 The recent Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects with

124 d hoc analysis of the Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With

125 in the FOURIER trial (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With

126 notably, the FOURIER (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects with

127 (3) investigations into the basic science of outcomes research, with an emphasis on methodological ad