コーパス検索結果 (1語後でソート)
通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 " (FARs) to compute confidence intervals for relative hazards.
2 rtional hazards models were used to estimate relative hazards.
4 independently associated with SCD in whites (relative hazard 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.
6 thout prior VTE had an 18% hazard reduction (relative hazard 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99; P=0.040).
8 onversion were associated with risk of AIDS (relative hazard 0.91 [95% CI 0.84-1.00], p=0.04) and dea
10 er HAART initiation also improved prognosis (relative hazard = 0.34, 95% confidence interval: 0.16, 0
12 s11884476, reached genome-wide significance (relative hazard = 0.3; P =3.370 x 10(-9)) after statisti
13 32 and C-C chemokine receptor 2 (CCR2)-64I (relative hazard = 0.44); 2) interleukin 10 (IL10)-+/+ in
14 combination with CCR5-Delta 32 or CCR2-64I (relative hazard = 0.45); and 3) IL10-+/+ in combination
15 okers (per standard deviation (SD) increase, relative hazard = 0.74, 95% confidence interval: 0.55, 0
16 was significant for invasive breast cancer (relative hazard = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.65, 0.95; P for trend
17 oth those who did and did not receive HAART (relative hazards = 0.06 and 0.33, respectively; p < 0.00
18 icantly lower risk of bloodstream infection (relative hazard, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.6
19 icantly lower risk of bloodstream infection (relative hazard, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.6
20 children than among wt/wt children (P=.056; relative hazard, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-1.1
21 CI, 0.13 to 0.80; P=0.02) and colon cancer (relative hazard, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.96; P=0.04).
22 a decreased risk of invasive breast cancer (relative hazard, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.80; P=0.02) and
23 tes was detected among HCV-infected persons (relative hazard, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-4.4
27 duction associated with vitamin E treatment (relative hazard, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.87; P=0.014).
28 ases versus 126 cases per 1000 person-years (relative hazard, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4
29 re randomization had a 44% hazard reduction (relative hazard, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.00; P=0.048), w
30 interval, 0.50-0.87), sudden cardiac death (relative hazard, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.8
32 therapy group and 9.5% in the placebo group (relative hazard, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89]; P = 0.006)
33 erval, 0.69-0.98), cardiovascular mortality (relative hazard, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.8
34 nce interval, 0.37-0.86), and heart failure (relative hazard, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.9
35 wer risk for death in the hospital (adjusted relative hazard, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.93]) and at 30
37 line (eg, for >200 cells/muL above baseline; relative hazard, 0.71; P = .02), although it was no long
38 nprovoked VTE, the hazard reduction was 27% (relative hazard, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94; P=0.016).
39 ents treated at for-profit centers (adjusted relative hazard, 0.74; 95 percent confidence interval, 0
40 ases versus 166 cases per 1000 person-years (relative hazard, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.93; P=0.01).
41 o group, a significant 21% hazard reduction (relative hazard, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.94; P=0.010).
44 atients of cardiologists at 1 year (adjusted relative hazard, 0.82 [CI, 0.65 to 1.04]) and at maximum
45 eduction in the primary composite end point (relative hazard, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.9
46 not receiving any antihypertensive therapy (relative hazard, 0.91; 95 percent confidence interval, 0
47 25 among women randomly assigned to placebo (relative hazard, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.13]; rate diffe
48 ction was caused by one or more viral types (relative hazard=0.3 [95% CI 0.21-0.42], and 0.14 [0.08-0
49 erence, there was an increased risk of AIDS (relative hazard 1.39; 95% CI 1.16-1.67, p=0.0004) and al
51 val: 0.55, 0.99) but not in current smokers (relative hazard = 1.13, 95% confidence interval: 0.83, 1
53 followed by those with undiagnosed diabetes (relative hazard = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.48, 3.56) and diabetes
55 djusted relative hazard of cancer mortality (relative hazard = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.
56 1.13, 4.49) and age >45 years at initiation (relative hazard = 1.92, 95% confidence interval: 0.98, 3
61 e analysis included age older than 45 years (relative hazard, 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0
62 treated in not-for-profit centers (adjusted relative hazard, 1.20; 95 percent confidence interval, 1
63 th risk of nosocomial bloodstream infection (relative hazard, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.6
64 percent higher risk of subsequent diabetes (relative hazard, 1.28; 95 percent confidence interval, 1
65 an increased risk of coronary heart disease (relative hazard, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to
66 c abnormalities was nonsignificantly higher (relative hazard, 1.36 [CI, 0.93 to 1.99]), largely becau
67 dergoing hemodialysis during the first year (relative hazard, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.64 to 3.06]), but the r
68 ociated with increased risk of HCMV disease (relative hazard, 1.49 and 1.44 per log increase, respect
69 re of 13.3% for VVI-40 vs 22.6% for DDDR-70 (relative hazard, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.97-2.46), also trended
71 ity of 6.5% for VVI-40 vs 10.1% for DDDR-70 (relative hazard, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.84-3.09) and hospitaliz
72 ith 73.3% for patients treated with DDDR-70 (relative hazard, 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0
73 e without HCV infection to develop diabetes (relative hazard, 11.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-96
74 ong women who had lower-extremity fractures (relative hazard, 18.1 [CI, 5.4 to 60.4]) or cancer (rela
78 likely to have had a myocardial infarction (relative hazard = 2.03, 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 4
79 ll count of <200 cells/microl at initiation (relative hazard = 2.25, 95% confidence interval: 1.13, 4
81 , 11.8), followed by sharing cotton filters (relative hazard = 2.4, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 5.0
82 olone group had an increased risk of stroke (relative hazard, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.14 to 4.23; P=0.02), fo
83 ted with a twofold increase in hip fracture (relative hazard, 2.2 [CI, 1.0 to 4.4]), but use of thyro
85 more likely to acquire a new HPV infection (relative hazard, 2.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-4.7
86 alysis confirmed regional perfusion defects (relative hazard, 2.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-5.1
87 up experienced venous thromboembolic events (relative hazard, 2.7 [95% CI, 1.4 to 5.0] [P = 0.003]; e
88 .10; P = 0.009) and low global flow reserve (relative hazard, 2.93; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-6.6
89 d the strongest predictor of seroconversion (relative hazard = 3.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.3, 9.9
91 a threefold increased risk for hip fracture (relative hazard, 3.6 [95% CI, 1.0 to 12.9]) and a fourfo
92 e hazard, 18.1 [CI, 5.4 to 60.4]) or cancer (relative hazard, 3.9 [CI, 1.6 to 9.4]) and for 90 days a
93 ith undetectable NT-proBNP after adjustment (relative hazard 4.0 [95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1 to
94 variates, was highest for sharing "cookers" (relative hazard = 4.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.4, 11.
95 ratio, 7.37; P= .024), progression to AIDS (relative hazard, 4.01; P=.03), and viral set point (P= .
96 4]) and for 90 days after inpatient surgery (relative hazard, 4.9 [CI, 2.4 to 9.8]) or nonsurgical ho
99 unt < or = 53 cells/ml versus > 53 cells/ml (relative hazard = 6.18, 95% CI 2.99-12.76) and hematocri
100 age, sex, body fat, M, and AIR, higher ALT [relative hazard 90th vs. 10th centiles (95% CI): 1.9 (1.
102 rticipants of normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9), relative hazard (95% confidence interval) of incident st
103 eferent PLMI <5 group had a 2-fold increased relative hazard (95% confidence interval, 1.14 to 3.49;
104 9) for one or more births with GDM; adjusted relative hazards (95% CI) were 0.9 (0.6-1.4) for one or
105 were associated with increased risk of ESRD; relative hazards (95% confidence interval) were 3.04 (1.
106 diseased vessels, and clinical presentation, relative hazards (95% confidence limits) for MI or death
107 coinfection was associated with an increased relative hazard (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] [95% confide
109 er adjustment for potential confounders, the relative hazards (and 95% confidence intervals) for card
111 d subdistribution hazard regression to model relative hazard based on age, APOE genotype, sex, educat
112 competing risks analysis: the cause-specific relative hazard ((cs)RH) and the subdistribution relativ
116 rent PLMA <1 group had a 1.26-fold increased relative hazard for all-cause cardiovascular disease.
117 Compared with eGFR 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), the relative hazard for all-cause graft loss increased in an
119 s was associated with the loss of GBV-C RNA (relative hazard for death as compared with men with pers
120 postoperative time demonstrated an increased relative hazard for death in frail patients (hazard rati
123 unadjusted intention-to-treat analysis, the relative hazard for fracture (cinacalcet versus placebo)
124 sis (a measure of actual drug exposure), the relative hazard for fracture was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0
125 ziliensis and helminths took longer to heal (relative hazard for healing, 0.47 [95% confidence interv
127 s, margin status, tumor grade, and age), the relative hazard for patients whose stroma expressed SPAR
129 However, the risk varied by CRP tertile: the relative hazards for African Americans compared with Cau
130 portional hazards regression to estimate the relative hazards for age, race/ethnicity, family history
131 inked mortality files, the authors estimated relative hazards for all-cause and cause-specific mortal
139 de Kaplan-Meier survival curves and adjusted relative hazards from the Cox proportional hazards model
140 These associations were driven by higher relative hazard in normotensive people (compared with th
141 1935 patients (49.2%) in the placebo group (relative hazard in the cinacalcet group vs. the placebo
144 e control group (n=2476), corresponding to a relative hazard of 1.05 (95% CI 0.84-1.32, intention-to-
145 tality increased with each age decile with a relative hazard of 1.09 (95% confidence interval: 1.08 t
146 doubling of NT-proBNP was associated with a relative hazard of 1.3 (95% CI 1.0 to 1.6) for coronary
147 proportional hazards modeling, the adjusted relative hazard of 3-year graft failure for cadaveric do
148 y >15% between measurements had a 50% higher relative hazard of adverse event than those whose galect
149 ng 1990 to 1993 as the reference period, the relative hazard of AIDS was 1.04 (95% confidence interva
156 glucose tolerance had the greatest adjusted relative hazard of cancer mortality (relative hazard = 1
157 ention in older persons are limited, and the relative hazard of cardiovascular disease associated wit
161 causes of 2.66 (95% CI, 1.42 to 4.99) and a relative hazard of death from AIDS of 47.61 (CI, 5.69 to
162 x 10(9) cells/L after HAART initiation had a relative hazard of death from all causes of 2.66 (95% CI
163 ng diagnosis was associated with an elevated relative hazard of death in comparison with other AIDS-d
164 ween September, 1997, and March, 1998, had a relative hazard of death of 0.16 (0.08-0.32), which rose
165 of diagnosed diabetes than men and a greater relative hazard of death than nondiabetic women, leading
166 for the number of T cells transplanted, the relative hazard of developing fatal GVHDLS was 62-fold h
171 between education/income and CVD events, the relative hazard of incident CVD associated with a 1-cate
172 ype 2 diabetes at baseline and estimated the relative hazard of incident type 2 diabetes over 3.2 yea
173 confidence interval [CI]: 2% to 17% greater) relative hazard of mortality and a 25% greater (95% CI:
174 counts of greater than 0.350 x 10(9)/L, the relative hazard of mortality was 1.6 to 2.3 times higher
176 fter adjustment for age, sex, and study, the relative hazard of SCD associated with each C allele at
178 With a Cox's model, we estimated that the relative hazard of stroke at any point for people with s
179 x proportional hazards regression model, the relative hazard of suicide was lowest among participants
180 x proportional hazards regression model, the relative hazard of suicide was lowest among participants
183 lure/death compared with IHHD patients, with relative hazards of 0.45 (95% confidence interval [95% C
185 hose in the bottom quintile had age-adjusted relative hazards of 3.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1
186 ring use of a seroincident cohort, estimates relative hazards of AIDS for persons at equal duration o
188 eatinine ratios <10 mg/g as a reference, the relative hazards of AKI, adjusted for age, gender, race,
189 Compared with normal subjects, the adjusted relative hazards of cancer mortality were 1.1 (95% confi
202 treated by surgery only, the relative risks (relative hazard) of early recurrence (recurrent disease
203 In unadjusted analyses, pericardial fat (relative hazard per 1-SD increment: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.15,
204 is were at increased risk for earlier death (relative hazard per SD increase, 1.15 [CI, 1.01 to 1.30]
205 l fractures, and severe vertebral fractures (relative hazard per SD increase, 1.58 [CI, 1.06 to 2.35]
206 th longer lactation were stronger among GDM (relative hazard range 0.14-0.56; P = 0.03) than non-GDM
211 in which 7-year EFS was only 34% (P < .001; relative hazard rate [RHR] = 2.2) and OS was 46% (P < .0
213 competing risk survival analysis to compare relative hazard rates associated with age, hypertension,
216 or breast cancer deaths after diagnosis, and relative hazard rates for women with ER-positive and ER-
219 c reconstruction of epidemic trees, but uses relative hazards rather than serial intervals to assign
221 resolution D) was a significant univariate (relative hazard ratio 0.79 per SD change, p = 0.011) and
222 nal hazards models provided estimates of the relative hazard ratio for mortality from all causes, bre
223 In an adjusted multivariable analysis the relative hazard ratio was 1.8 (95% CI, 1.1-2.9, P=.03) w
224 with zidovudine plus didanosine (18 percent; relative hazard ratio, 0.50; P<0.001), zidovudine plus z
225 1), zidovudine plus zalcitabine (20 percent; relative hazard ratio, 0.54; P<0.001), or didanosine alo
227 ed vs not assigned to reduced sodium intake (relative hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI
228 41, 36 kb upstream of PROX1 on chromosome 1 (relative hazard ratio, 0.69; Fisher's combined P = 6.23
229 ose assigned vs not assigned to weight loss (relative hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.87; P<.001).
230 as mean diameter of extracapsular extension (relative hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% confidence interval: 1.
232 xual or mucosal and parenteral transmission (relative hazard ratios, 0.72 and 0.63, respectively; com
233 ment and each outcome event, in terms of the relative hazard reduction and absolute risk reduction (A
235 ently associated with improved survival: B1 (relative hazard (RH) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI
236 apy without protease inhibitors before AIDS (relative hazard (RH) = 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI
238 o placebo, the unadjusted intention-to-treat relative hazard (RH) for venous thromboembolism declined
240 LMW apo(a) and Lp(a) level >123 nmol/L, the relative hazard (RH) of ASCVD was 1.73 (P < 0.0005), com
241 th was associated with a 40% increase in the relative hazard (RH) of developing CDC class A or B symp
244 in a neighborhood characterized by poverty (relative hazard (RH)=1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI)
245 than twice the risk of all-cause mortality (relative hazards (RH) 2.30, 95% confidence interval (CI)
248 less likely to be listed than male patients (relative hazard [RH] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI],
249 tly associated with risk of nonfatal stroke (relative hazard [RH] 1.18; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.66), fatal s
250 with an increased risk of early barotrauma (relative hazard [RH] 1.67 per 5-cm H2O increment; 95% CI
251 ndent risk factor for both repeat gonorrhea (relative hazard [RH] = 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI
252 Kringle-IV repeats) predicted ASCVD events (relative hazard [RH] = 1.38, P = 0.02; RH = 1.58, P < 0.
253 ndependent predictor of disease progression (relative hazard [RH] for each doubling of HIV-1 RNA leve
254 was not associated with progression to AIDS (relative hazard [RH], .82; 95% confidence interval [CI],
255 the 707 patients not taking clarithromycin (relative hazard [RH], 0.25 [95% confidence interval (CI)
256 up, but not significantly so (14% reduction; relative hazard [RH], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]
257 creased risk of all-cause mortality overall (relative hazard [RH], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]
258 en in the placebo group had MI or CHD death (relative hazard [RH], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]
259 HCV-uninfected patients, 264 events [24.4%]; relative hazard [RH], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]
260 ival was 13.0 and 20.5 months, respectively (relative hazard [RH], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]
261 arrested for new gun and/or violent crimes (relative hazard [RH], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]
262 sociated with smoking in HIV-infected women (relative hazard [RH], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.10-1.60; P=.003),
263 d risk of high-trauma fracture (multivariate relative hazard [RH], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]
264 ve partners with either DRB1*0301-DQB1*0201 (relative hazard [RH], 1.60; P=.009) or DRB1*1503-DQB1*06
265 by week 8 were associated with progression (relative hazard [RH], 1.67; 95% confidence limits [CL],
266 an 2 mile/d (17.8 vs 10.3/1000 person-years; relative hazard [RH], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]
268 that risks of HPV included sexual behavior (relative hazard [RH], 10.10; 95% confidence interval [CI
270 apid disease progression (I/I249 vs. V/V249: relative hazard [RH], 2.19 [95% confidence interval {CI}
271 ion to high-grade cytological abnormalities (relative hazard [RH], 2.2 [95% confidence interval, 1.2-
272 tients with pre-HAART nucleoside experience (relative hazard [RH], 2.86; 95% confidence interval, 2.2
273 virologic failure in the VCV 25 mg/day arm (relative hazard [RH], 21.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]
274 g diarrhea-related hospitalization or death (relative hazard [RH], 3.2, 95% CI, 2.1-5.1 increase 4-24
276 associated with slower progression to AIDS (relative hazard [RH]=0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI],
277 infarction or coronary heart disease death (relative hazard [RH]=0.79, 95% confidence intervals [CI]
278 After multivariate adjustment, both mild (relative hazards [RH] = 1.24; 95% confidence interval [C
279 fourth quartiles of baseline Lp(a) level had relative hazards (RHs) (compared with the first quartile
281 used multivariate Cox models to estimate the relative hazards (RHs) of incident diabetes related to b
284 ing use of a seroprevalent cohort, estimates relative hazards since the beginning of therapy eras for
286 ng of time after kidney transplantation, the relative hazard was 0.56 (95% confidence interval, 0.32
287 Caucasians (34% versus 56% at 5 years); the relative hazard was 0.7 (95% CI, 0.5 to 0.9) after adjus
292 tes in a Cox proportional hazards model, the relative hazard was 3.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1
294 For stroke mortality, the corresponding relative hazards were 0.94 (0.86-1.03), 1.15 (1.05-1.25)
295 siologic, behavioral, and dietary variables, relative hazards were 1.0, 0.96, 0.71, 0.64, and 0.70 in
298 ty of the hypoxemia index, the corresponding relative hazards were 1.6 (95% CI, 0.6-4.4), 2.9 (95% CI
WebLSDに未収録の専門用語(用法)は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。