ライフサイエンスコーパス: relative value

1 production (32.84% in absolute and 51.34% in relative values).

2 following disease progression to have a high relative value.

3 a high relative value and Rel to have a low relative value.

4 ppler and the captopril test have the lowest relative value.

5 e good for another, based on a comparison of relative value.

6 enchyma were evaluated based on corrected or relative values.

7 diagnosed in the population was calculated (relative value = (1/cost) x number patients detected).

8 broadly inclusive policy that considers the relative value and harm of GOF research.

9 for patients who consider Tox to have a high relative value and Rel to have a low relative value.

10 t-related potential (ERP), which scaled with relative value and strongly predicted the degree of beha

11 ho consider time with toxicity to have a low relative value and time following disease progression to

12 strong attention effect, which implies that relative value and top-down attention engage overlapping

13 We hypothesize that support in exploring the relatives' values and the deceased's wishes can lead to

14 cause food choices are made according to the relative value assigned to each option, examination of v

15 ve utility of the stimuli involved, i.e. the relative value assigned to the stimuli to compare the po

16 context of a reduction in the difference in relative value between objects, or an error following a

17 , and posterior cingulate cortex encoded the relative value between the chosen and next best option a

18 Relative value biases the competition between stimuli, j

19 ve KM values for the two rRNA promoters, and relative values for free RNA polymerase concentrations d

20 We compared relative T values with relative values for toxic effects from the max-grade app

21 effectiveness research aims to elucidate the relative value (including clinical benefit, clinical har

22 calizing findings in partial epilepsy, their relative value is disputed.

23 elf, stimulus-action contingencies and their relative value must be encoded to establish a value-bias

24 spectral region are measured and compared to relative values obtained using rhodamine 101 as Phi(f) s

25 We compared the relative value of 2 strategies for assessing whether ear

26 c (ROC) study was devised to investigate the relative value of a scatter-subtraction strategy in SPEC

27 dingly, decreasing uncertainty increases the relative value of actions that pay-off immediately.

28 equential decision, whereas dACC encoded the relative value of adapting choices from the option with

29 asks that measure behavioral modulation when relative value of affective (positive and negative) stim

30 and in the progressive discrimination of the relative value of available choice options, thus mapping

31 n IFG was not modulated by reductions in the relative value of available options.

32 This study was designed to test the relative value of C4d staining, histology, and serology

33 The relative value of captopril renography and arteriography

34 neurons in the parietal cortex represent the relative value of competing actions predicted by this mo

35 ive neural signal in humans that encodes the relative value of competing decision alternatives and st

36 ue the pairwise interaction, so although the relative value of cooperation increases, the total value

37 r about the neural mechanisms that track the relative value of each available stimulus to guide behav

38 measures of attention were controlled by the relative value of each location.

39 sion analysis was performed to determine the relative value of each MR imaging feature.

40 However, the relative value of each of these technologies is unclear.

41 measurements, with some suggesting that the relative value of each parameter may differ at different

42 to do in a given situation by assessing the relative value of each possible response.

43 The relative value of gemcitabine-based combination chemothe

44 The relative value of increasing ifosfamide dose in combinat

45 arbitrator of religious belief, changes the relative value of Jewish Israelis' lives (compared with

46 e early times (<10 ms) and the apparent high relative value of k(2).

47 ol, encode a decision variable signaling the relative value of leaving a depleting resource for a new

48 ny questions remain unanswered including the relative value of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemothera

49 tes exploration and rapid learning about the relative value of novel behavioral options, and shows th

50 rea (LIP), which is thought to represent the relative value of objects in space.

51 f there is substantial uncertainty about the relative value of one treatment versus another.

52 y enhancement of k(x) and an increase of the relative value of P(x), the intersystem crossing rate to

53 from treatment (experimental and standard), relative value of quality and length of life, and percei

54 d potential global freshwater ES scaled by a relative value of roughly 4-20%, with a median of 16%.

55 The relative value of routine anaerobic blood culture for re

56 The relative value of S(CONE) was significantly greater than

57 up of neurons, a subset was sensitive to the relative value of sucrose reinforcers, as assessed by a

58 medial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) encodes the relative value of the current decision.

59 a new option to a choice set can change the relative value of the existing options, which is a viola

60 We have determined the relative value of the features of the metabolic syndrome

61 ility of food that additionally reflects the relative value of the food.

62 The relative value of the hit rate on the subset of the coll

63 ulty and possibly due to fluctuations in the relative value of the juices.

64 ed particularly for preferences based on the relative value of the preferred trait.

65 n goal-directed actions is determined by the relative value of their consequences.

66 perating-characteristic curves to assess the relative value of these sperm measurements in discrimina

67 nt of MFS is physician work, measured as the relative value of work (RVW), which has 2 components: ti

68 used an immediate increase in cell volume to relative values of 1.09 and 1.33, respectively.

69 antitative framework with which to bound the relative values of cell-cell and cell-ECM interactions a

70 have uncertainties of approximately 5%, the relative values of deltachi (and the zero-field splittin

71 Experimentally determined relative values of electronic coupling (H(AB)) for the t

72 The relative values of k(cat) (95) and k(cat)/K(m) (1800) fo

73 s (H110N, N131A, F53A, and F53L) have higher relative values of k(cat) and k(cat)/K(m) for DDBO over

74 Relative values of k(cat) for the L. major enzyme with i

75 ctor of immunity to influenza in humans; the relative values of other correlates are uncertain.

76 Both models found marked differences in the relative values of p, the virion production rate per cel

77 when the drug is present, accounting for the relative values of relaxation rates measured in single-m

78 r a given blood pressure is dependent on the relative values of resistances in different vascular bed

79 e total peak capacity does not depend on the relative values of the individual dimensions but only on

80 The steady-state compartment sizes provided relative values of the kinetic coefficients characterizi

81 s available at different points in time, the relative values of the options are discounted according

82 y facilitated the accurate comparison of the relative values of the order parameters.

83 rdance/concordance can be predicted from the relative values of the ratio of pollen to seed flow and

84 To systematically assess the relative values of these databases, a case study has bee

85 The relative values of these permeabilities are compared to

86 ctly adiabatic regimes, characterized by the relative values of those input rates.

87 In turn, relative values of W(ex) are determined by continuous wa

88 n ability to represent the specific, and not relative, value of a particular proportion.

89 also signal the profitability (that is, the relative value) of the offer, but even these signals are

90 The resource-based relative value scale payment schedule was fully phased i

91 ons about the American Medical Association's Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC).

92 s every 5 years is heavily influenced by the Relative Value Scale Update Committee, which is composed

93 edicare and Medicaid Services Resource Based Relative Value Scale).

94 rtunity to correct the skewed resource-based relative value scale, and supports innovation in primary

95 The Resource-Based Relative Value Scale, designed to reduce the inequality

96 The transition to Medicare's resource-based relative value scale-based physician payment system bega

97 With the resource-based relative-value scale, Medicare payments are based on the

98 ter the implementation of the resource-based relative-value scale, RVUs per Medicare beneficiary grew

99 992, Medicare implemented the resource-based relative-value scale, which established payments for phy

100 A relative value score was established by consensus and as

101 concentrations, which for both absolute and relative values showed a rostrocaudal gradient with high

102 which choice results from accumulation of a relative value signal that linearly weights payoffs for

103 These attention-modulated relative value signals might serve as the input of a com

104 ns are whether the brain encodes absolute or relative value signals, and what role attention might pl

105 ventral striatum encoded fixation-dependent relative value signals: activity in these areas correlat

106 e built computational models to quantify the relative values subjects ascribed to pain for themselves

107 vements in two key metrics, namely, cost per relative value unit (decline of 19.0% [decline of $7.60

108 Unit costs were analyzed per technical relative value unit (RVU) and per examination.

109 t (95% confidence interval: 7.5, 12.3), with relative value unit (RVU) of 7.8 (95% confidence interva

110 determine the overall utilization rates and relative value unit (RVU) rate changes between 1993 and

111 rmine the overall nationwide utilization and relative value unit (RVU) volume and rates and changes i

112 logist, per relevant procedure, per relevant relative value unit (RVU), and as a percentage of revenu

113 Cost per relative value unit and relative value units per full-ti

114 Once the relative value unit has been established, it is multipli

115 28.8% [$12.18 of $42.21]; P < or = .001) and relative value unit per full-time equivalent employee (i

116 ource costs exceeded Medicare resource-based relative value unit reimbursements for all patients with

117 ning physician payment is established by the relative value unit, and how these are derived has been

118 ,440 vs 80,327), generated reimbursement per relative value units (28.55 US dollars vs 37.02 US dolla

119 dollars vs 2,973,319 US dollars), generated relative value units (50,440 vs 80,327), generated reimb

120 Comorbidities and work-related relative value units (categorized into low, moderate, an

121 (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3), and work-related relative value units (moderate vs low: OR, 1.9; 95% CI,

122 complexity were calculated in physician work relative value units (RVUs) per Medicare procedure.

123 t, a more recent analysis suggests that more relative value units (RVUs) per unit time are issued for

124 Surgeon total relative value units (RVUs), a measure of productivity,

125 mmary were estimated based on the procedural relative value units (RVUs), the average clinical cost p

126 pecialty-focused effort on the basis of work relative value units (RVUs).

127 The associated work relative value units (wRVUs) were also examined to measu

128 Relative resource costs (relative value units [RVUs]), number of examinations per

129 Relative value units and geographic cost indices determi

130 en multiplied by a dollar conversion factor, relative value units can be used to calculate the reimbu

131 edure rates were combined with corresponding relative value units from the Centers for Medicare and M

132 (387 vs. 406 days; p = 0.001), and mean work relative value units generated (7,404 vs. 9,497; p < 0.0

133 Cost per relative value unit and relative value units per full-time equivalent employee w

134 Average relative value units per Medicare procedure increased by

135 cases resulted in an additional 1371.46 work relative value units per year.

136 physician services measured in terms of the relative value units used in the Medicare fee schedule t

137 As a result of this reform, relative value units were created for current procedural

138 l procedure), and complexity (eg, adhesions; relative value units).

139 l outcomes adjusted for age, race, sex, work relative value units, American Society of Anesthesiologi

140 l outcomes adjusted for age, race, sex, work relative value units, American Society of Anesthesiology

141 rocedures with greater complexity and higher relative value units, and those with a contaminated/infe

142 ss), procedural characteristics (complexity, relative value units, emergency, and wound classificatio

143 creation and definition and on assignment of relative value units.

144 Medicare payments are based on the number of relative-value units (RVUs) assigned to physicians' serv