ライフサイエンスコーパス: profit

1 omics of antimicrobial drugs (cost of use vs profit).

2 llars of sustainability (people, planet, and profit).

3 determine a roguing schedule that optimises profit.

4 ulatory compliance rather than manufacturing profit.

5 not a procedure that has been developed for profit.

6 Among the top 5% of MCCs, 14 of 18 were for-profit.

7 neral oil as a means of illegally increasing profit.

8 an = 22.4 h) were positively related to wind profit.

9 nd, more remarkable, hospitals posted record profits.

10 istribution of fishing is chosen to maximize profits.

11 rge: most random MPA designs reduce expected profits.

12 ry costs or even increase fishery yields and profits.

13 dation are desirable to maximize quality and profits.

14 waste streams is often desirable to maximize profits.

15 abundance while increasing food security and profits.

16 ents, and using fewer resources means higher profits.

17 ing "high-risk, high-reward" decks maximized profits.

18 avoring newer treatments were 39.5%, not-for-profit; 54.4%, jointly funded; and 65.5%, for-profit tri

19 avoring newer treatments were 50.0%, not-for-profit; 69.2%, jointly funded; and 82.4%, for-profit tri

20 SinCHet software is freely available for non-profit academic use.

21 us to control for both timber yield and net profit across strategies.

22 consensus that drug and insurance companies' profits added to costs, although physicians, hospitals,

23 residents living in facilities that were for profit (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.09; 95% confidence i

24 The prior-knowledge fitting (ProFit) algorithm is typically used to quantify 2D spect

25 The prior knowledge fitting (ProFit) algorithm, with a new simulated basis set consis

26 reduced pest damage and a 50% gain in cotton profit among smallholders.

27 Trials jointly funded by not-for-profit and for-profit organizations appear to report pos

28 rk between farmers' and their perceptions of profit and loss affects landscape scale patterns in pest

29 mpare practices between nephrologists at for-profit and nonprofit centers.

30 For-profit and nonprofit hospices may respond differently to

31 54 health plans during 1997, we compared for-profit and not-for-profit plans with respect to rates of

32 moral behavior and neural representations of profit and pain.

33 e food/feed and will increase the economical profit and sustainability of the fishery industry.

34 The non-profit and volunteer sector provides substantial contrib

35 Pro-poor taxes on profits and capital gains seem to support expanding heal

36 n sectors can enhance the connection between profits and the alleviation of poverty.

37 ally incommensurable values, such as between profits and the well-being of marginalized women.

38 n metric tons (MMT) in catch, $53 billion in profit, and 619 MMT in biomass relative to business as u

39 of contrasting management regimes on catch, profit, and biomass of fish in the sea.

40 contemporary culture's focus on consumption, profit, and economic growth.

41 fficiency, net power output, levelized cost, profit, and net CO2 reduction.

42 de-offs between economic indicators, such as profit, and social indicators, such as lifestyle prefere

43 ed management strategies can maintain yield, profit, and weed suppression while delivering enhanced e

44 everage contracts and associated incentives, profits, and advertising; corporate food vending and ass

45 ation was strong for taxes on capital gains, profits, and income ($16.7, 9.16 to 24.3), but not for c

46 se associations with taxes on capital gains, profits, and income, which tend to be more progressive.

47 n Brazilian data on mosaic ecology, land-use profits, and questionnaire results concerning landowner

48 Especially tumor therapy may profit as it requires a combination of both selectivity

49 Naturally, the model will profit as more accurate measurements of folding and bind

50 becoming increasingly common due to the huge profits associated with this type of criminal activity.

51 these hospitals will focus on payer mix and profits, avoiding disadvantaged patients and paying less

52 nstitute (IDRI), which operates as a not-for-profit biotech company, may start to pay off during the

53 discovery possible at institutional and non-profit budgets.

54 bution of costs, with a decrease in hospital profits but potentially lower costs of health care deliv

55 are truly private, players can inflate their profit by misreporting the actual outcomes.

56 The young scientist will profit by paying mind to two forms of balance: the contr

57 e choice involved paying to decrease pain or profiting by increasing pain.

58 personal initiative training increased firm profits by 30%, compared with a statistically insignific

59 using Miscanthus x giganteus reduces system profits by 8% and reduces nitrate-N loads by 12% compare

60 s but emphasizes that predicted increases in profits can only be achieved if the fishery is well unde

61 Disparities in quality of education at for-profit centers might partially explain previously docume

62 hrologists who spent </=20 min, those at for-profit centers more often cited lack of reimbursement as

63 nsured, Medicaid-insured and patients at for-profit centers were more likely to be unassessed.

64 Providers at for-profit centers were significantly less likely to spend >

65 tor precursor cells from adult skin in a non-profit cGMP environment.

66 oetin dosing patterns suggest that large for-profit chain facilities used larger dose adjustments and

67 Patients from for-profit chain facilities, compared to nonprofit chain fac

68 of 33% to 36%, especially in the largest for-profit chain facilities.

69 The type of facility (profit, chain, and affiliation status) at which a patien

70 the mean epoetin dose and dose adjustment by profit, chain, and affiliation status.

71 thout commercial consideration or commercial profit." Christian authorities insist that organ donors

72 , 0.42 to 0.67) higher star ratings than for-profit contracts (P < 0.001) after controls were set for

73 d significantly higher star ratings than for-profit contracts.

74 t is the effect of for-profit versus not-for-profit delivery of care on patient outcomes?

75 cilities (n = 28,199), patients in large for-profit dialysis chain facilities (n = 106,116) were cons

76 The proliferation of multi-unit for-profit dialysis chains in the ESRD industry has raised c

77 operated by Dialysis Clinic Inc., a not-for-profit dialysis provider, between January 1, 1998, and D

78 sophisticated mechanisms to hijack for their profit different pathways of glycan synthesis.

79 eficient educational preparation and harmful profit-driven clinical practices.

80 Instead, patterns emerge of profit-driven fishing for attributes related to costs an

81 tial challenges in its transformation from a profit-driven public hospital-centred system to an integ

82 The change in profit due SSIs was $2 268 589.

83 ed Groups to estimate the change in hospital profit due to SSIs.

84 20 leaders from private, public, and not-for-profit entities, including cancer researchers and clinic

85 ice but appears to be biased in favor of for-profit entities.

86 and engage in more green signaling than for-profit entities.

87 plant's net electrical output and decreases profits, especially during times of high electricity pri

88 ologists higher in not-for-profit versus for-profit facilities (60% vs 28% reported).

89 Compared with nonprofit facilities, for-profit facilities administered, on average, an additiona

90 age, compared with nonprofit facilities, for-profit facilities increased epoetin doses 3-fold for pat

91 vel of 34.6%) to 24,986 U/wk at chain 2 (for-profit facilities with a mean hematocrit level of 36.5%)

92 of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission rate, and profit for patients with an SSI when compared with patie

93 At prices higher than these higher profits for operating CCS retrofits can be obtained by m

94 s question by inviting subjects to trade off profits for themselves against pain experienced either b

95 timuli, in particular speech, is proposed to profit from "entrainment" of endogenous neural oscillati

96 Apparently, they do not profit from CBT of the techniques studied here.

97 oma cell fitness, BCR-targeted therapies may profit from combinations with drugs targeting BCR(-) tum

98 s a spatial bioeconomic model that maximizes profit from crop and energy products, subject to the req

99 for more aggressive tumors and therefore may profit from early detection measures.

100 ongly correlated with the time it can itself profit from flying in the wake of another bird.

101 ymnesium and other harmful algal species may profit from focus on processes following physical contac

102 patients with a dismal prognosis who may not profit from further TACE sessions.

103 r pickings, while shy males and bold females profit from meagre winters.

104 ible to invasion by selfish individuals that profit from receiving the social benefits but fail to co

105 variation in Arabidopsis for the ability to profit from rhizobacteria-mediated plant growth-promotio

106 Therefore, the genetics of speciation can profit from studies of changes in gene expression as wel

107 us complementation, where inferior genotypes profit from superior virus products available within the

108 at, although bioremediation contractors must profit from the activity, the primary driver is regulato

109 ate, and future progress will unquestionably profit from the adoption of methods that have provided v

110 ." I have had the remarkable good fortune to profit from the development of new techniques that have

111 cations in mycobacterial genetics would also profit from the improved Flp/FRT system.

112 atural genetic variation for the capacity to profit from the plant growth-promoting function of a ben

113 ng oxadiazole rings, it would be possible to profit from the positive aspects of each of the componen

114 owth indicated variation in host capacity to profit from the symbiosis.

115 Our data suggest that ALL patients might profit from therapeutic strategies that release MRD cell

116 ery or analysis of traditional medicines may profit from this effect-directed profiling of complex sa

117 As the leading bird in a formation cannot profit from this up-wash, a social dilemma arises around

118 sed individuals in need of vaccination would profit from viral strains with defined attenuation mecha

119 eption, one important facet of language, has profited from findings and theory in nonhuman primate st

120 llular immunology and molecular genetics and profited from the advances of the latter as well as post

121 benefit from attenuation of mGluR signaling, profited from the elimination of drep-2.

122 Molecular Mechanisms', and the two meetings profited from the lively discussions fuelled with questi

123 nical research over the last two decades has profited from the technique of positron emission tomogra

124 city after endotracheal suctioning, patients profiting from a consecutive recruitment maneuver could

125 hylated sulfur indicate that the host likely profits from antioxidant protection provided by the symb

126 Like single cells, the hypothalamus also profits from intracellular pathways known to work as fue

127 , our multilocus association-clustering test profits from the availability of large numbers of geneti

128 This scalable synthetic route profits from the strategic utilization of substrate-cont

129 Lateral prefrontal cortex encoded profit gained from harming others, but not self, and tra

130 ences had lower dorsal striatal responses to profit gained from harming others.

131 es is altered when the species loss per unit profit generated from the FMU is considered.

132 To what extent is the increasing emphasis on profit generation at US academic institutions shackling

133 eously give rise to large gains in fisheries profit (>100%), fisheries yields (>30%), and fish stock

134 Pilgrim Health Care (HPHC), a large not-for-profit health plan.

135 6 to 2 points; P < .001), or enrolled in for-profit health plans (-4 points; 95% CI, -7 to 0 points;

136 It is widely believed that for-profit health plans are more likely than not-for-profit

137 ot lower among beneficiaries enrolled in for-profit health plans than among those enrolled in not-for

138 n high-cost procedures would be lower in for-profit health plans than in not-for-profit plans.

139 inal coronary angioplasty were higher in for-profit health plans than they were in not-for-profit hea

140 it health plans are more likely than not-for-profit health plans to respond to financial incentives b

141 h plans than among those enrolled in not-for-profit health plans.

142 rofit health plans than they were in not-for-profit health plans; the rates of use of other common co

143 e affected for-profit HHAs more than not-for-profit HHAs (111-55 days [51% decrease, P =.002] vs 46-3

144 The decrease affected for-profit HHAs more than not-for-profit HHAs (111-55 days [

145 ompared with nonprofit hospice agencies, for-profit hospice agencies had a higher percentage of patie

146 For-profit hospices (1087 discharges from 145 agencies), com

147 For-profit hospices compared with nonprofit hospices had a s

148 ikely to have their index operation at a for-profit hospital (34.6% vs 22.0%; P < .001).

149 ) and were higher after discharge from a for-profit hospital (IRR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.56).

150 ent to which this practice is related to for-profit hospital status and affects payments and mortalit

151 among those initially hospitalized at a for-profit hospital, and are related to increased overall pa

152 he Northeast or Midwest, and being a not-for-profit hospital.

153 r an 18-year study interval (1990-2007), for-profit hospitals and those with low profit margins were

154 ll households and public and private not-for-profit hospitals in Ghana.

155 While for-profit hospitals potentially have financial incentives t

156 We found no evidence that for-profit hospitals selectively treat less sick patients, p

157 For-profit hospitals were less likely to use discharge beta-

158 Patients (n = 11,658) treated at 58 for-profit hospitals were of similar age and gender, but wer

159 .9% vs 65.3% +/- 21.3% for community not-for-profit hospitals, p < 0.001).

160 and two American acute care, mid-sized, non-profit hospitals.

161 raging animals will increase their energetic profit if they can make use of floral cues that more acc

162 rain yields, mass of harvested products, and profit in the more diverse systems were similar to, or g

163 tals are given incentives to achieve maximum profit, incentives for hospitals and physicians must be

164 ticularly if fishing costs are low, although profit increases available through optimal MPA-based man

165 tnership with Project Data Sphere, a not-for-profit initiative allowing data from cancer clinical tri

166 ls (7.5% vs. 4.5%) and less likely to be for-profit institutions (8.8% vs. 19.9%) (all P values <0.00

167 SUTTA's binaries are freely available to non-profit institutions for research and educational purpose

168 estigators from academic, nonprofit, and for-profit institutions with relatively few and contained po

169 agencies, private insurance schemes, and non-profit institutions.

170 the fast growing fish farming in Asia where profit is minimal and therefore given high priority.

171 erating substances in milk in order to raise profits is unfortunately worldwide.

172 with alcohol and tobacco suggests that a for-profit legal cannabis industry will increase use by maki

173 For-Profit: Submit request for for-profit license from the web-site.

174 ital included index hospitalization at a for-profit, major medical school-affiliated, or low-volume h

175 mpetitive market, safety-net status, and low profit margin associated with increased risk of ED closu

176 es when coproduced with higher-volume, lower-profit margin biofuels.

177 Consequently, with risk adjustment, overall profit margin decreased from 5.8% for patients without c

178 eimbursement (ie, payer costs), and hospital profit margin for cases with and without complications.

179 elderly), and market factors (ownership mix, profit margin, location in a competitive market, presenc

180 , with hospitals experiencing a reduction in profit margin.

181 esticides, an increased need to protect crop profit margins and in many developing world countries wh

182 ossil-derived counterparts and could improve profit margins at biorefineries when coproduced with hig

183 e should cigarette sales decline further and profit margins be eroded.

184 ncompensated care costs, and improvements in profit margins compared with hospitals located in the 25

185 verall cost of production and offer a better profit margins over the varieties.

186 07), for-profit hospitals and those with low profit margins were more likely to close than their coun

187 Given these hospitals' narrow profit margins, readmission penalties may have a profoun

188 We focus on profit maximising farm management plans and use bird spe

189 tress-axis activity (low cortisol) engage in profit-maximizing decision-making.

190 For-profit MCCs received 77% of funds (208 of 363).

191 edicts that carriers of these risk genotypes profit most from interventions changing the environment

192 Patients profiting most obviously from intraductal antimicrobials

193 ablished and incentives changed to alter the profit motives of Chinese hospitals and physicians alike

194 ial investment of 1,000 US dollars yielded a profit of 112 US dollars more after 1 day of trading for

195 N and P from 1 m(3) of pure urine can make a profit of euro2.25.

196 ks that are not counterbalanced by potential profit of products that are of limited use in the develo

197 emely sensitive determination of BFRs taking profit of the potential of atmospheric pressure chemical

198 nrollment size, Medicaid proportion, and for-profit or not-for-profit status.

199 ers, dental and medical professionals, a non-profit organisation (the International Myeloma Foundatio

200 ral intervention designed by Ugandan not-for-profit organisation Raising Voices-could reduce physical

201 or social auxiliary workers from a local non-profit organisation.

202 intervention was implemented by two not-for-profit organisations from September, 2013, to May, 2016.

203 CHDI is a not-for-profit organization focused solely on HD.

204 and Project Medishare, an affiliated not-for-profit organization, provided a large-scale relief effor

205 r-profit organizations compared with not-for-profit organizations (33 versus 41; P=0.048).

206 ompared with 25 for trials funded by not-for-profit organizations (P=0.0006).

207 funded, and 29 for trials funded by not-for-profit organizations (P=0.0007).

208 als jointly funded by not-for-profit and for-profit organizations appear to report positive findings

209 prior to 2000, clinical trials funded by for-profit organizations appeared more likely to report posi

210 icates that therapeutic trials funded by for-profit organizations are more likely to report positive

211 Recent cardiovascular trials funded by for-profit organizations are more likely to report positive

212 ion per year was 52 for trials funded by for-profit organizations compared with 25 for trials funded

213 ublication per year for trials funded by for-profit organizations compared with not-for-profit organi

214 2 (67.2%) of 137 trials funded solely by for-profit organizations favored newer treatments over stand

215 gher citation rates for trials funded by for-profit organizations were consistently observed in analy

216 was 46 for trials funded exclusively by for-profit organizations, 37 for trials jointly funded, and

217 Of the 104 trials funded solely by not-for-profit organizations, 51 (49%) reported evidence signifi

218 itive findings than trials funded by not-for-profit organizations, as are trials using surrogate rath

219 itive findings than trials funded by not-for-profit organizations.

220 cal trial results that are funded by not-for-profit organizations.

221 sitive findings than those funded by not-for-profit organizations.

222 incident dialysis patients at 81 US not-for-profit outpatient dialysis clinics from October 1995 to

223 For-profit ownership of dialysis chain facilities appears to

224 ed with the following hospital features: for-profit ownership vs government owned (8.5 vs 5.5 inserti

225 irment admitted to acute care hospitals, for-profit ownership, larger hospital size, and greater ICU

226 in nonrural areas declined by 27%, with for-profit ownership, location in a competitive market, safe

227 on between nursing home care quality and for-profit ownership.

228 Patients with less formal education profited particularly from the MM-IP.

229 To date, the profit pillar of sustainability has taken precedence ove

230 significantly higher rates than the not-for-profit plans for 2 of the 12 procedures we studied and h

231 other characteristics of the plans, the for-profit plans had significantly higher rates than the not

232 CMS should give increasing attention to for-profit plans with lower quality ratings and consider dev

233 ing 1997, we compared for-profit and not-for-profit plans with respect to rates of cardiac catheteriz

234 r in for-profit health plans than in not-for-profit plans.

235 e food vending and associated incentives and profits; posters/advertisements for soft drinks, fast fo

236 All too often financial considerations of profit primarily determine whether a technology will be

237 Any decision to further expand the for-profit private hospital market should not be made withou

238 e Allen Institute for Brain Science is a non-profit private institution dedicated to basic brain scie

239 erves poor people in many countries; not-for-profit providers that operate on a range of scales; form

240 Participants were recruited from a non-profit, regional hospital in the southeast United States

241 This can be seen as the profit related to the "hospital service" segment of crit

242 This can be seen as the profit related to the product line segment of critical c

243 When predicting financial profits, relationship outcomes, longevity, or profession

244 anagement can substantially increase fishery profits relative to optimal nonspatial management but th

245 ete plasmid set is available through the non-profit repository AddGene and a web-based version of our

246 e subsequently made available to the not-for-profit research community by Monsanto.

247 te of rodents, which can be requested by non-profit research organisations free of charge.

248 Usage of this software is limited to non-profit research to use (see README).

249 at operate 11% of the clinics, and 3 are for-profit retail chains that operate 73% of the clinics.

250 ournal is priced to maximize the publisher's profits, scholars on average are likely to be worse off

251 equivalent dose were seen in the private for-profit sector in six pilots, ranging from US$1.28 to $4.

252 The private for-profit sector's prominence in health-care delivery, and

253 e of QAACTs, particularly in the private for-profit sector.

254 driven mainly by changes in the private for-profit sector.

255 twork in the Amazon is largely determined by profit seeking logging activities.

256 ty between lateral prefrontal cortex and the profit-sensitive region of dorsal striatum.

257 lts suggest that extreme drought could cause profit shortfalls of more than $100 million if water tem

258 Academic/non-profit: Source: available at no cost under a non-open-so

259 We sought to determine whether for-profit status influenced hospitals' care or outcomes amo

260 nes) Initiative, we investigated whether for-profit status influenced hospitals' patient case mix, ca

261 Impact of for-profit status on care and outcomes was analyzed overall

262 Hospital conversion to for-profit status was associated with improvements in financ

263 Hospitals that converted to for-profit status were more often small or medium in size, l

264 Conversion to for-profit status, 2003-2010.

265 a high ratio of nurses to patient-days, for-profit status, and nonacademic status) were associated w

266 pulation density around facilities, facility profit status, and patient Medicaid eligibility.

267 dar time, cause of ESRD, and dialysis center profit status, and persisted after adjustment for variou

268 for effects of age, sex, income, plan model, profit status, and region of the country.

269 egression models included index hospital for-profit status, discharge counts, geographic region, rura

270 ng number of hospitals have converted to for-profit status, prompting concerns that these hospitals w

271 l, residential hospice, or other) by hospice profit status.

272 ignificant difference in location of care by profit status.

273 mortality, regardless of index hospital for-profit status.

274 dicaid proportion, and for-profit or not-for-profit status.

275 For-Profit: Submit request for for-profit license from the w

276 Strategically placed MPAs can also increase profits substantially compared with nonspatial managemen

277 rious mutations rely more on chance and thus profit the most from ecological processes that enhance d

278 ernal diffusion encoding can be applied with profit to a range of other 3D DOSY experiments.

279 2%, breakeven premiums necessary for organic profits to match conventional profits were only 5-7%, ev

280 rofit; 54.4%, jointly funded; and 65.5%, for-profit trials (P for trend across groups = .002).

281 rofit; 69.2%, jointly funded; and 82.4%, for-profit trials (P for trend across groups = .07).

282 We calculate the profits under two scenarios (perfect and imperfect infor

283 oject Data Sphere LLC (Cary, NC, USA), a non-profit universal access data-sharing warehouse.

284 sufficiently established to drive prices and profits up.

285 iew software is freely available for not-for-profit use at http://bioinformatics.bc.edu/marthlab/Eagl

286 using MATLAB and is freely available for non-profit use at http://crab.rutgers.edu/~dslun/gdbb.

287 is freely available to all academic and non-profit users at: http://zdock.umassmed.edu.

288 kage is free to academic, government and non-profit users, and licensed to others for a fee by the Un

289 a license which is free for academic and non-profit users.

290 NMRbox is freely available to not-for-profit users.

291 shortages of radiologists higher in not-for-profit versus for-profit facilities (60% vs 28% reported

292 h reviews may ask: What is the effect of for-profit versus not-for-profit delivery of care on patient

293 nd contribute the most to achieving it while profiting very little.

294 nited Kingdom vs non-United Kingdom, not for profit vs commercial), and appropriateness for sight-imp

295 Not-for-profit webpages were of significantly greater length tha

296 om authors affiliated with organizations for-profit were symmetrical without heterogeneity, whereas m

297 ry for organic profits to match conventional profits were only 5-7%, even with organic yields being 1

298 ferences correlated with neural responses to profit, where participants with stronger moral preferenc

299 steam demand maximizes plant efficiency and profit while minimizing emissions and levelized cost whe

300 of the rs12979860 T nonresponder allele can profit with respect to SVR prediction by further determi