ライフサイエンスコーパス: rating

1 MS score >/=6 and at least one post-baseline rating).

2 in patients with at least one post-baseline rating.

3 -related behaviour was assessed via maternal ratings.

4 spinal tracts correlated with patients' self-ratings.

5 .0005), with similar effects seen for parent ratings.

6 ment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) ratings.

7 on, or to retaliate, through the exchange of ratings.

8 There were no false-negative ratings.

9 ght and obesity improved subjective appetite ratings.

10 1) total number of reviews; 2) average star rating; 3) review filtering rate; and 4) number of revie

11 rade, and Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale rating (5-point scale, ranging from worse to very much i

12 calculated the median, mean, and proportion rating 7 to 9 (critically important), and analyzed comme

13 tage point improvement in patient experience ratings (95% CI, -3.9 to 5.1).

14 hreshold of consensus was >/= 75% of experts rating a diagnostic item as very important or important.

15 rwent a diagnostic interview and psychiatric ratings, a comprehensive neuropsychological battery, ove

16 r, DB decreases hunger and increases satiety ratings after a meal and shows potential for decreasing

17 Publicly reported hospital ratings aim to encourage transparency, spur quality impr

18 howing a tonal familiarity effect on tension ratings, amusics provided comparable tension ratings for

19 PD severity, cognitive function, depression rating and quality of life.

20 Instrument; preference concordance, based on rating and ranking of key attributes; and decision quali

21 clinical experience followed by 2 rounds of rating and revisions.

22 ralization gradients in both behavioral risk ratings and brain responses in the left and right anteri

23 Afterward, handling ratings and catheterization times were obtained for stan

24 daily (24-h) EI and between fasting appetite ratings and certain eating behavior traits with daily EI

25 This iterative process of ratings and comments yielded a strong consensus on stand

26 the associations between psychiatric symptom ratings and quantitative anatomic and white matter micro

27 Delphi study with 5 rounds of ratings and revisions until relative consensus was achie

28 ggest that combined measurements of appetite ratings and RMR could be used to estimate EI in weight-s

29 tion of fasting prospective food consumption ratings and RMR was the best predictor of daily EI (R(2)

30 Subjective pleasantness ratings and skin conductance responses did not differ be

31 was explored by comparing the Arabic CAM-ICU ratings and the total score of SOFA (severity of illness

32 n important metric impacting hospital safety ratings and value-based purchasing; hospitals may have m

33 e obtained through trial by trial confidence ratings and were used to compute metacognitive ability.

34 With regard to visual ratings and whole-brain count consistency, average visua

35 in plasma concentrations, hunger and satiety ratings, and food intake in healthy volunteers.Lingual b

36 t David's score and our novel randomized Elo-rating are the best methods when hierarchies are not ext

37 to the decision making process as confidence ratings are tightly coupled to decision accuracy.

38 nt P2P platforms, including both cases where ratings are used to vote on the content produced by user

39 risky decision task with repeated happiness ratings as a measure of momentary mood was also tested i

40 om severity after 20 weeks (blinded observer ratings) as assessed by the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scal

41 ing photographs in lieu of live patient scar rating assessments, and to determine the interrater and

42 %), and Met/Met (N=19, 26.8%)) received mood ratings before infusion, after infusion, and for the sub

43 bsequently were assigned a level of evidence rating by the panel methodologist.

44 was investigated using the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitiv

45 We evaluated two scales for rating cerebellar ataxias: the Composite Cerebellar Func

46 Here we aim to predict post-ECT depressive rating changes and remission status using pre-ECT gray m

47 g for Premenstrual Tension observer and self-ratings completed every 2 weeks during clinic visits.

48 In contrast, carer ratings correlated with atrophy in established networks

49 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force quality rating criteria.

50 Pain ratings disclosed the anticipated analgesic interaction

51 on decreases both antral motility and hunger ratings during the fasting state, possibly because of a

52 ose to the duodenum also suppressed appetite ratings, eating behavior was not altered.

53 Rank-rating evaluations further showed the significant effect

54 , reflecting the proportion of beneficiaries rating experiences as 8 or above on a 0-to-10-point scal

55 pleted a peer feedback task where subjective ratings following peer 'acceptance' or 'rejection' were

56 tals, Society of Thoracic Surgeons composite rating for coronary artery bypass grafting (STS-CABG), a

57 Primary outcome measures were the Rating for Premenstrual Tension observer and self-rating

58 Finally, the Rating for Premenstrual Tension scores in the second and

59 Both self- and observer-rated scores on the Rating for Premenstrual Tension were significantly incre

60 r of training, the proportion of Performance ratings for Core procedures (n = 6931) at "Practice Read

61 Participants assigned importance ratings for each item using a 1-9 scale.

62 Higher ratings for externalizing and internalizing symptoms at

63 DCS group, compared with the sham group, VAS ratings for hunger and the urge to eat declined signific

64 Monthly Nielsen ratings for testosterone DTCA in the 75 largest DMAs.

65 ratings, amusics provided comparable tension ratings for Western and Indian melodies on both timbres.

66 Reductions in clinical severity rating from baseline to the end of treatment (beta, 0.25

67 a morbidity or mortality has prompted an "I" rating from the United States Preventive Services Task F

68 sm, malignant neoplasm) was compared in each rating group by using the Cochran-Armitage trend test.

69 ctive questionnaires, and patient from carer ratings, has important implications for clinical trial d

70 However, these quality ratings have never been evaluated for induced sputum spe

71 direct response trajectories toward negative ratings (i.e., less response competition).

72 nce longer-term food intake-related appetite ratings in individuals with obesity.In a randomized para

73 ) with a significant association with parent ratings in the social responsiveness scale.

74 The star rating includes 57 measures across 7 areas of quality.

75 Self-reported word knowledge ratings increased for those words that were followed by

76 Disability Rating Index (DRI; score range, 0 [no disability] to 100

77 e, Beck Depression Inventory, Affective Pain Rating Index of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire

78 for all procedures, the proportion of Zwisch ratings indicating meaningful autonomy ("Passive Help" o

79 digital peer-review processes that aggregate ratings into reputation scores.

80 I (WPPSI-III) and two scales of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool (BRIEF-

81 executive composite score from the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool Version

82 that while attention can increase confidence ratings, it must be voluntarily deployed for this increa

83 her traffic light labels (TLLs), Health Star Rating labels (HSRs), or a control [nutrition informatio

84 e SYRCLE Risk of Bias tool, and a confidence-rating methodology was used to score the quality of evid

85 quality was good as demonstrated by reliable rating methods.

86 fasting gastrointestinal motility and hunger ratings, motilin and ghrelin plasma concentrations, sati

87 partial colectomy), the proportion of Zwisch ratings (n = 357) indicating near-independence ("Supervi

88 ses explain variation in trial-by-trial pain ratings not captured by a previous fMRI-based marker for

89 all measured metrics, including average star ratings, number of reviews, review removal rate, and eva

90 A rating of "excellent" for the psychiatry clerkship (odds

91 ndents to both rounds assigned an importance rating of 5 or more in round 2.

92 CCFS) Scale and Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA), in patients with spinocerebella

93 cebo, using the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA; mean difference [MD] = +2.70, 95

94 n tomography scan is to assign a dichotomous rating of positive or negative for the presence of amylo

95 Blinded self-assessment rating of the overall stiffness for individual patients

96 melanopsin pulses and provided a structured rating of the perceptual experience.

97 Parent ratings of ADHD symptoms (Development and Well-Being Ass

98 Parent ratings of ADHD symptoms were obtained using the Develop

99 Ratings of anxiety were assessed 3-h post-infusion and f

100 iameter change was not related to subjective ratings of attractiveness, but was positively correlated

101 Gemini twin birth cohort, including parental ratings of child EOE and EUE using the Child Eating Beha

102 dicted the increase in smoker's pleasantness ratings of cigarette cues.

103 Participants provided baseline ratings of clear (happy, angry) and ambiguous (surprised

104 stress (and their interaction) on momentary ratings of cocaine and heroin craving.

105 agnitude activity correlated negatively with ratings of cocaine craving and positively with how high

106 RSD-24 score </=8), as well as self-assessed ratings of depression, global functioning, and quality o

107 gnificantly increased the psychiatrists' CGI ratings of disease severity by 0.65 [0.27; 1.02] points.

108 ndition compared with the placebo condition, ratings of drug liking following 15 mg of oxycodone were

109 Participants' ratings of emotion transitions predicted others' experie

110 onstructs that are tapped via attractiveness ratings of faces, and support the development of methodo

111 ary sleep outcomes were self-reported online ratings of insomnia severity (Insomnia Severity Index) a

112 e) to 5 (strongly disagree) scale, explained ratings of less than 5, and optionally provided comments

113 Finally, there were no differences between ratings of lower-dose cigarettes, but the 0.763-mg cigar

114 (pupil diameter change) was correlated with ratings of men's facial attractiveness.

115 a reaction time task and provided perceptual ratings of noxious and tactile stimuli.

116 Furthermore, mean subjective ratings of pain were lower in the active ibudilast condi

117 ith assessments of self-views and likability ratings of peers.

118 of picture-word associations and subjective ratings of pleasantness and arousal in response to the p

119 The pattern was similar for ratings of salience, distress, personal relevance, globa

120 Quality ratings of studies were based on a modified version of t

121 cortisol were associated with more negative ratings of surprised faces, and with more direct respons

122 rmance (accuracy) and subjective experience (ratings of target visibility and choice confidence) over

123 Importantly, performers' ratings of the "goodness" of their performances were pos

124 erventions have a positive impact on trainee ratings of their faculty intraoperative teaching perform

125 High pleasantness ratings of unpleasant stimuli correlated with left dorsa

126 Food craving was indicated with subjective ratings of visual cues of high-calorie food.

127 The primary end point was maximum rating on the visual analog scale for drug liking.

128 provided two to four months of daily symptom ratings on the DRSP.

129 Outcomes were blinded ratings on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) and

130 ffects of well-characterized DFs on appetite ratings or energy intake were identified from a systemat

131 significantly related to changes in symptom ratings over time.

132 sed hunger (P = 0.008) and increased satiety ratings (P = 0.01) after a meal (500 kcal) in 13 women w

133 he duodenum (P = 0.001) and decreased hunger ratings (P = 0.04).

134 A separate, independent rating panel scored the clinical scenarios on a scale of

135 on tasks, yielding nodule classification and rating performance concordant with those of practicing r

136 In multivariate regression, SRU rating predicted both any neoplasm (odds ratio, 2.58; P

137 and group level, and that the randomized Elo-rating repeatability provides researchers with a standar

138 ctivity scaled with breathlessness intensity ratings, revealing a potential interface between sensati

139 ensity less than 40 on an 11-point numerical rating scale (0 [no pain] to 100 [maximum pain] in 10-po

140 Age of onset, survival, ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALS-FRS) scores and respiratory function w

141 The ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R) and King's stage correlated with

142 ioning, as assessed by the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) (range, 24-168), Scale for the Asses

143 or greater in the past 3 days on the numeric rating scale (Fisher exact test, P = 0.0026), Patient-Or

144 ssessed group effects on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) scores over time while controlling

145 as change in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), administered by raters blinded to

146 effect on scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD).

147 he change in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) score (range, 0 to 52, with highe

148 (range, 0-125), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) (range, 0-60), Young Mania Rating S

149 50% in baseline Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score at any postbaseline visit dur

150 t was change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline to week 6

151 in score on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and the main analytic approach con

152 least 15 on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).

153 assessed by the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).

154 0.008) and International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (MD = +3.8, 95% CI = +1.39 to + 6.41, p = 0

155 isorders Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) motor subscale (part 3) in the

156 Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part I score and other validate

157 Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) part III, of 208 individuals wh

158 Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) parts II and III.

159 chyQuant, an illustrated self-report numeric rating scale (NRS) for itch severity.

160 scores measured using the 0 to 10 numerical rating scale (NRS), primary biliary cholangitis-40 (PBC-

161 re performed using the Operative Performance Rating Scale (OPRS).

162 eir tremor with the Tolosa-Fahn-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (TRS) during optimised VIM or VO lead stimu

163 f change of the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) Total Motor Score, and a reduction

164 ptive results of Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) scores and quality of life measures

165 t differences in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) Section II scores off medication, U

166 ing Scale (MADRS) (range, 0-60), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) (range, 0-44), Social and Occupation

167 Efficacy was assessed with the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS).

168 aseline and change scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS; range 0-60) up to 3 weeks for olanza

169 difference [MD], -0.96 point on a numerical rating scale [95% CI, -1.64 to -0.34 point]; standardize

170 , 58 achieved remission (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D] score </=7 at weeks 10 and 12), and

171 ing Scale [MADRS] or the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D]) and self-report scales (the Quick

172 ministered (the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] or the Hamilton Depression Rating S

173 motor score of the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS]).

174 ensity was evaluated via a 101-point numeric rating scale and a visual analog scale, and discomfort w

175 change was evaluated by using both a visual rating scale and an automated volumetric segmentation to

176 ating scales including the Unified Myoclonus Rating Scale and the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating

177 s was assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Question

178 tensity (PI) assessed on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale at 10, 20, and 30 min postadministration wa

179 as noninferiority on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale at week 16.

180 ratings) as assessed by the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-24).

181 ed on DSM-IV criteria and a 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD17) score 16 underwent

182 with severe post-partum depression (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D] total score >/=26) i

183 re, eight or more flushes per week, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression of 19 or more, or Fatigue Im

184 ed to translate the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale for Irritable Bowel Syndrome (GSRS-IBS) int

185 The SCAR scale is a reliable rating scale for postoperative linear scars, and photogr

186 ale therefore represents a reliable standard rating scale for postoperative scar cosmesis.

187 ealthy older participants (Clinical Dementia Rating Scale global scores of 0) participating in the Ha

188 fort was evaluated using a four-point verbal rating scale hourly for the first 8 hours after surgery

189 ad significantly lower itch based on numeric rating scale in the past 3 days (Wilcoxon rank sum test,

190 ms were measured by Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale Irritable Bowel Syndrome (GSRS-IBS) version

191 d for the ICU and the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale mapped to Diagnostic Statistical Manual 5 c

192 Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale motor scores; 0.76, 0.68-0.83), CSF variabl

193 o underwent the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale motor test, and 2 subscores were extracted:

194 y (Kendall tau = 0.336, P < 0.0001), numeric rating scale of itch in the past 24 hours (tau = 0.266,

195 ate of 0.56 points on the Spastic Paraplegia Rating Scale per year was slightly lower than the longit

196 nt response (% change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale pre- to post-treatment).

197 l Quality of Life Index and Gastrointestinal Rating Scale questionnaires were administered to gauge i

198 s mean (SE) change in the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale score was -15.9 (1.6) for ADS-5102 (n = 63)

199 inical disease progression in PSP is the PSP Rating Scale score.

200 correlated with Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale scores (r(2) = 0.25, 0.22, and 0.28, respec

201 ures of depression (mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores 19.40 [SD 6.76] at baseline vs 8.79

202 ct per cent reduction in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores after treatment.

203 lations with the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale scores were tested.

204 of technical and nontechnical skills, Global Rating Scale scores, errors, and time to complete the pr

205 was associated with lower Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes (beta = -0.19; P < .001), and

206 ere associated with higher Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes (beta = 1.64; P < .001) and lo

207 slope in rate of change of Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes has 89% power when all partici

208 clinical instruments: the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes, a verbal memory test (logical

209 Changes in the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale total maximal chorea score and total motor

210 defined for the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale total motor score, total functional capacit

211 aseline to week 12 in the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale total score for ADS-5102 vs placebo in the

212 al scale scores (Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale) and DAT imaging during 4-year follow-up.

213 g Scale, and the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale) and generally lasted 1 to 4 hours before t

214 were pain during walking (11-point numerical rating scale) and physical function (Western Ontario and

215 atigue measures (i.e., Likert scale, numeric rating scale) or a short fatigue measure were comparable

216 rage pain: 4.5 +/- 2.0 on a 10-point numeric rating scale) were included in the study and randomly al

217 sed on bivariate correlations, pain (numeric rating scale), level of glycated hemoglobin A1c, level o

218 primary outcome was pain intensity (numeric rating scale, 0-10; whereby 0 indicated no pain and 10 i

219 ive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Young Mania Rating Scale, and Global Assessment of Functioning).

220 ive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Young Mania Rating Scale, and Global Assessment of Functioning, were

221 Scale-Revised, the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale, and the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating

222 Depression Supplement (SIGH-ADS), the Mania Rating Scale, and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.

223 were rated using a validated 4-point visual rating scale, and then categorized by severity ('none/mi

224 re of pain (eg, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Affective Pain

225 Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, MDS-UPDRS III), fitness, health and well-b

226 100-mm visual analog scale, 11-point numeric rating scale, or other numeric pain scale), function (me

227 eracy in Adults and the Medication Adherence Rating Scale, respectively.

228 ality of life were assessed using the Verbal Rating Scale, Visual Analog Scale, and Short Form 36.

229 ty-one healthy controls (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-24 item [HDRS-24] = 1.7) and 26 medication-

230 in plasma creatinine than in ALS functional rating scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R; p<0.001).

231 nt-rank analysis of function (ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised) and overall survival, analysed at

232 Appel ALS score, ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised, and McGill Quality of Life Single-

233 easured by total score on the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised, at first evaluation (r = -0.14818;

234 hmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, and Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 assessments.

235 aviors at age 8 years using Conners' Teacher Rating Scale-Revised: Long Version.

236 ity as rated by the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale.

237 set, and score on the Revised ALS Functional Rating Scale.

238 ys 6 and 42, on an 11-point (0- to 10-point) rating scale.

239 clinician-rated Hamilton Depression (HAM-D) rating scale.

240 ng Scale and the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale.

241 n were defined using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.

242 tely depressed (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale=30+/-6) and about half were treatment naive

243 about current pain intensity [0-10 numerical rating scale]).

244 ccess was defined as a score >/= 8), numeric rating scales assessing quality of life (parent and chil

245 red by total score on the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scales Auditory Hallucinations (PSYRATS-AH).

246 Visual rating scales can be used to identify distinct AD subtyp

247 d to (1) validate the combined use of visual rating scales for identification of AD subtypes; (2) cha

248 tensor imaging (DTI) findings and functional rating scales in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) may

249 h a standardized video protocol and clinical rating scales including the Unified Myoclonus Rating Sca

250 rogression biomarkers to complement clinical rating scales is clear.

251 tment differences were seen in other symptom rating scales or cognitive composite scores.

252 ences, before vs after treatment, in numeric rating scales to assess quality of life: an increase of

253 clinical evaluations including neurological rating scales, sleep questionnaires, smell test, and sym

254 n neuropsychological measures and subjective rating scales.

255 visit, mood was assessed using standardized rating scales.

256 dependent than clinical-neurological patient rating scales.

257 The Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating (SCAR) scale was developed and validated as a too

258 d Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine quality rating scheme for individual studies.

259 hecklist was used, combined with the Quality Rating Scheme for Studies and Other Evidence.

260 ogression was assessed by the ALS Functional Rating Score-Revised and the ALS Milano-Torino Staging s

261 hole-brain count consistency, average visual rating scores were highly correlated with automated dete

262 and independently categorized all incidents, rating severity and preventability (agreement, 68%-90%;

263 ognitive performance outcomes and subjective ratings showed consistency across objective measures, an

264 rst] to 30 [best] points), Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-Sum of Boxes; 0 [best] to 18 [w

265 Rating systems for high-performance buildings implicitly

266 For 3 major hospital ratings systems, we estimated travel burden as the addit

267 elied less on tonality cues than controls in rating tension for Western melodies.

268 Higher confidence ratings than the control condition were found under endo

269 lans that exited generally had lower quality ratings than those that remained, and the exits were not

270 not extremely steep, where the original Elo-rating, the I&SI and the recently described ADAGIO perfo

271 y released the Overall Hospital Quality Star Rating to help patients compare hospitals based on a 5-s

272 The panel methodologist assigned ratings to the selected articles according to the level

273 The panel methodologist assigned ratings to the selected studies according to the level o

274 rategy, and the panel methodologist assigned ratings to them according to the level of evidence.

275 ontrols assigned significantly lower tension ratings to Western melodies compared to Indian melodies,

276 itive sensitivity (i.e., how well confidence ratings track perceptual decision accuracy) over time an

277 ect of Hearing Enhancement on Medical Status Ratings Twenty-one elderly psychiatric patients had lowe

278 roposed indices were compared against expert rating using PERCIST, BPIVOL and BPISUV showed better ag

279 The SCAR scale ratings using photographs were found to be largely equiv

280 de 1) and Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale rating (very much improved) with no treatment-related ad

281 ergy X-ray absorptiometry), fasting appetite ratings (visual analog scales), eating behavior traits (

282 ndation was retained if both mean and median rating was 4 or higher.

283 The star rating was designed to assess overall quality of the ins

284 Visual rating was performed by three raters, including one neur

285 This increase in pleasantness ratings was also correlated with an increase in resting-

286 ons of principal diagnosis clinical severity rating were used to evaluate an a priori hypothesis of e

287 Appetite ratings were assessed with the use of visual analog scal

288 Higher leadership ratings were associated with sufficient information (bet

289 e the specific images, not the people, their ratings were biased by the attractiveness of the learned

290 Ratings were collected immediately after cases that invo

291 In total, 1150 patient ratings were collected.

292 Facilitator adherence ratings were high (> 93%).

293 Monthly testosterone advertising ratings were linked to DMA-level testosterone use data f

294 essel region, and visualization and handling ratings were measured for the MR imaging guidewires.

295 Subjective appetite ratings were obtained from visual analog scales before a

296 ared to an example SFD (p < 0.05), and their ratings were strongly correlated (EEN:r = 0.83, SFD:r =

297 ts' behavioral responses (i.e., satisfaction ratings) were modulated systematically by the attraction

298 g them to unipartite ones with only positive ratings, which may result in losing a large amount of in

299 in the probability of clinically significant ratings while holding constant the overall level of psyc

300 es using two or more months of daily symptom ratings with the Daily Record of Severity of Problems (D