ライフサイエンスコーパス: screening test

1 updated recommendations for use of the ESBL screening test.

2 urning for treatment of a positive chlamydia screening test.

3 the incidence of TTM and identify a suitable screening test.

4 , both key features of an infectious disease screening test.

5 utine, daily practice may limit its use as a screening test.

6 cent believed TVU or CA-125 was an effective screening test.

7 isual acuity (BCVA) <20/40 or failure of any screening test.

8 e pelvic examination as a 1-time or periodic screening test.

9 ts, limitations, and harms associated with a screening test.

10 a community health registry, and had an ABI screening test.

11 had low sensitivity, limiting its value as a screening test.

12 naire, a validated 3-question alcohol misuse screening test.

13 ing any operator-dependent colorectal cancer screening test.

14 dren who passed and children who failed each screening test.

15 eterinary diagnosis would offer an effective screening test.

16 Use of this panel has potential as a screening test.

17 tionally used to increase the sensitivity of screening tests.

18 enge of developing safe and effective cancer screening tests.

19 appropriate to use variant-specific in vitro screening tests.

20 g interval in light of vaccination and novel screening tests.

21 rments in any of the three visual processing screening tests.

22 sidered evidence on the accuracy of glaucoma screening tests.

23 nce and death through greater receipt of CRC screening tests.

24 nexpensive and non-invasive universal cancer screening tests.

25 reventive medical services, including cancer screening tests.

26 rs [range, 5 to 55.8 years]) underwent 4,992 screening tests.

27 underscoring the need for better population screening tests.

28 health, diet or exercise behavior, or use of screening tests.

29 test-related distress and the use of health-screening tests.

30 This is consistent for all screening tests.

31 orted as G6PD "normal" by current phenotypic screening tests.

32 rovide a useful complement to currently used screening tests.

33 s to who is best suited to administer vision screening tests.

34 952) did not identify harms with fewer urine screening tests.

35 and a random selection of those with normal screening tests.

36 ptable, and has accuracy comparable to other screening tests.

37 A rapid screening test (2 h) for the detection of polymyxin resi

38 s, 11.6% of patients received a colon cancer screening test (57.9 tests per 1000 person-years).

39 te the availability of inexpensive serologic screening tests, ~85% of individuals with celiac disease

40 We examined colorectal cancer screening tests according to quartiles of risk of mortal

41 To evaluate the screening test accuracy of radially arranged sectors aff

42 n = 137) and those with a positive dementia screening test (AD8 score >/=2, n = 120).

43 r AD8 scores: those with a negative dementia screening test (AD8 score 0 or 1, n = 137) and those wit

44 Data are lacking regarding whether cognitive screening tests administered at hospital discharge can b

45 In Preschoolers (VIP) Study (n = 4040), had screening tests administered by pediatric eye care provi

46 For screening tests administered by trained lay screeners, t

47 in Preschoolers (VIP) Study, with different screening tests administered each year.

48 ess to use non-invasive stool or blood based screening tests after refusing colonoscopy.

49 oma, modest familial risk, and the lack of a screening test and associated intervention, all argue ag

50 Employing HbA1c as a screening test and reserving OGTT for those with impaire

51 We conclude that GDH is an excellent screening test and that culture with isolate CCNA testin

52 between patients who performed CTCA as only screening test and those who performed CTCA and invasive

53 nohistochemistry (IHC) should be used as the screening test and whether screening should target all p

54 enable for biomarker identification and drug-screening testing and led to the identification of the E

55 mination on subjects with 1 or more abnormal screening tests and a random selection of those with nor

56 To discuss new colorectal cancer screening tests and highlight controversies regarding co

57 Only screening tests and methods cleared by the U.S. Food and

58 Therefore, development of new screening tests and methods for the detection of illicit

59 smokers) and the benefits and harms of these screening tests and of surgical resection of early-stage

60 iewed the evidence on the accuracy of vision screening tests and the benefits and harms of vision scr

61 seek out preventive health services, such as screening tests and vaccinations.

62 al management strategies, including improved screening tests and vaccines.

63 natures was compared with routine laboratory screening tests and Yale Observation Scale (YOS) scores.

64 how vaccination against HPV, changes to the screening test, and falling screening coverage will affe

65 s of the screening test, availability of the screening test, and patient preferences.

66 o evaluate the sensitivity of the GDH-Q as a screening test, and toxigenic C. difficile was found in

67 s and the health care system, false-positive screening tests, and adverse effects of subsequent unnec

68 result of nondetects in an assay, the use of screening tests, and other practical limitations.

69 ening, the accuracy of primary care-feasible screening tests, and the benefits and harms of treatment

70 There are important implications for the screening, testing, and likely success of vaccine candid

71 sus medical treatment; systematic reviews of screening tests; and observational studies of harms from

72 ening; the accuracy of primary care-feasible screening tests; and the benefits and harms of treatment

73 r or all-cause mortality; the harms of these screening tests; and the test performance characteristic

74 The primary screening tests are automated visual fields plus spectra

75 Accurate screening tests are available to identify syphilis infec

76 is update of each organization's guidelines, screening tests are grouped into those that primarily de

77 Routine coagulation screening tests are ineffective for diagnosing ATC and g

78 However, many cancer screening tests are invasive (digital rectal exams), exp

79 chool children who are unable to perform VIP screening tests are more likely to have vision disorders

80 In countries where biochemical screening tests are not common, symptomatic primary hype

81 CRC screening tests are ranked in 3 tiers based on performan

82 Prenatal diagnostic and screening tests are routinely offered to all women in pr

83 ks for false-positive results on lung cancer screening tests are substantial after only 2 annual exam

84 For this reason, faster and more sensitive screening tests are urgently needed.

85 Rapid and accurate screening tests are urgently required to protect and pre

86 ld be able to assess the clinical utility of screening tests as well as their accuracy and acceptabil

87 (Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test [ASSIST] substance-specific scores of >/=

88 o significant increase in the rate of use of screening tests associated with genomewide profiling, mo

89 In women with a negative screening test at entry, the rate ratio was 0.30 (0.15-0

90 test based on the benefits and harms of the screening test, availability of the screening test, and

91 st barium enema has largely disappeared as a screening test because it is widely perceived as a labor

92 from non-outbreak areas until a blood donor screening test becomes available have been implemented t

93 Echocardiography is commonly undertaken as a screening test before kidney transplantation; however, t

94 findings support the use of CTC as a primary screening test before therapeutic OC.

95 Few data exist for screening tests before 24 weeks' gestation.

96 et physicians' enthusiasm for several cancer screening tests before benefit has been proven suggests

97 th FWB transfusion can be minimized by rapid screening tests before transfusion.

98 ible triage strategies, based on the primary screening test being either the AHPV test or the HC2 tes

99 Main Outcomes and Measures: Accuracy of screening tests, benefits of screening, harms of screeni

100 sed to compare the rates of different cancer screening tests between RA patients and non-RA controls.

101 Standard OECD biodegradation screening tests (BSTs) have not evolved at the same rate

102 te-night salivary cortisol level is the best screening test but petrosal sinus sampling for ACTH may

103 eponemal or nontreponemal tests are accurate screening tests but require confirmation.

104 Transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) is a possible screening test, but there have been no large-scale studi

105 These tests are appropriate screening tests, but each has disadvantages relative to

106 r other recommended and covered colon cancer screening tests, but it seems that CTC is being held to

107 n be performed at home as a preliminary self-screening test by patients suspecting infertility for wa

108 A two-SNP screening test can identify the highest risk heterozygou

109 Although screening tests can accurately identify adults with chro

110 Fecal screening tests can be performed at home at low initial

111 Good-quality evidence suggests that common screening tests can help identify patients at higher ris

112 Screening tests can identify early-stage HCC, but whethe

113 lty, and dementia, and demonstrate how brief screening tests can make use of data realistically avail

114 he model was varied to reflect commonly used screening test categories, including conventional cultur

115 A sectors approach shows good screening test characteristics for the detection of CSME

116 a in FSU prisons and uncertainties regarding screening test characteristics.

117 All coagulation screening tests, coagulation factor assays, and platelet

118 For screening tests conducted by eye care professionals, the

119 udes of U.S. radiologists regarding three CT screening tests--coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS),

120 on, the current EIA may be of use as a rapid screening test during a norovirus outbreak investigation

121 OraQuick performed well as a screening test during an outbreak investigation and coul

122 Most common screening tests employed included SD OCT (56.6%), 10-2 H

123 o synthesize the evidence on the accuracy of screening tests, externally validated risk-stratificatio

124 All underwent DM screening tests (fasting capillary glucose [FCG] level,

125 members may have substituted a fully covered screening test (FOBT) for tests subject to the deductibl

126 supports the clinical use of stereopsis as a screening test for bilateral monocular function in infan

127 emerging as a potential frontline colorectal screening test for cancer prevention.

128 a simple, convenient, and highly predictive screening test for carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteri

129 The presence of a positive screening test for celiac autoantibodies does not appear

130 a score >30 in the Phototest cognitive test (screening test for cognitive impairment).

131 Colonoscopy is the preferred screening test for colorectal neoplasia; the fecal occul

132 assessed the accuracy of pulse oximetry as a screening test for congenital heart defects.

133 The prevalence of a positive screening test for depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depr

134 ylococcus aureus (MRSA) assay is a molecular screening test for detection of MRSA in nasal colonizati

135 ity and specificity to make them useful as a screening test for distinguishing IBD from other disorde

136 sm with nonenhanced CT serves as an adequate screening test for endoleak, causing volumetric increase

137 ndex (BMI)-for-age has been recommended as a screening test for excess adiposity in children and adol

138 nmentally friendly, particularly as a useful screening test for food analysis.

139 Albuminuria might be a useful screening test for generalized microvascular disease and

140 Cryptosporidium Chek test (TechLab, Inc.), a screening test for Giardia and Cryptosporidium, was eval

141 pressure measurement may not be a sufficient screening test for hypertension-related target-organ dam

142 Although fecal markers do show promise as a screening test for IBD, patient resistance to providing

143 The procalcitonin (PCT) assay is an accurate screening test for identifying invasive bacterial infect

144 computerized tomography (CT) as the initial screening test for identifying large esophageal varices.

145 now being introduced as a potential primary screening test for improved detection of cervical precan

146 verall, PCR for bla(KPC) represents the best screening test for KPCs with significantly higher sensit

147 etection, respectively, making it a suitable screening test for mycobacterial detection.

148 e of resting ankle-brachial index (ABI) as a screening test for PAD or as a risk predictor for cardio

149 f nasal nitric oxide has emerged as a useful screening test for PCD based on the very low levels in P

150 ics of CRP support its use as a tuberculosis screening test for people living with HIV with CD4 count

151 ead to the development of a novel diagnostic screening test for quickly detecting infected animals ch

152 As a screening test for ROs, a score > 0 had a high negative

153 c fetal biometry in the third trimester as a screening test for small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infan

154 ilis and that it can be used as a first-line screening test for syphilis serodiagnosis using the Euro

155 We proposed a noninvasive screening test for the diagnosis of female genital disea

156 When two acpcPNA probes were applied for the screening test for the double stranded HLA-B*58:01 and H

157 Abdominal CT as the initial screening test for varices could be cost-effective.

158 summary, the BD GeneOhm VanR assay is a good screening test for VRE in our population of predominantl

159 All of these technologies have trade-offs as screening tests for accuracy, availability, and costs.

160 Screening tests for Alzheimer's disease lack sensitivity

161 which could allow development of large-scale screening tests for asymptomatic vCJD prion infection.

162 ence on screening and diagnostic accuracy of screening tests for blood pressure in children and adole

163 UK are significantly less likely to receive screening tests for cancer that those without learning d

164 mercial insurance plan, we examined rates of screening tests for cervical, breast, and colon cancer i

165 ying commercially available peripheral blood screening tests for colon cancer (AUC of 0.81).

166 The best screening tests for detecting children with any targeted

167 Studies assessing candidate screening tests for detecting OAG in persons older than

168 Development of regular screening tests for early diagnosis of breast cancer is

169 STF reviewed the evidence on the accuracy of screening tests for GDM, the benefits and harms of scree

170 s evaluating accuracy and harms of serologic screening tests for HSV-2; RCTs assessing preventive int

171 ct evidence supports the utility of multiple screening tests for identifying preschool children at hi

172 USPSTF found adequate evidence that accurate screening tests for LTBI are available, treatment of LTB

173 We compared sensitivity of screening tests for NODAT at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 12 m

174 t the available evidence on risk factors and screening tests for osteoporosis in men.

175 mg/dL) at 10 weeks after transplantation as screening tests for the diagnosis of PTDM.

176 Of several approaches considered for SCID screening, testing for T-cell receptor excision circles

177 Compared with currently available screening tests, frequency-doubling technology (FDT) per

178 The three screening tests had a high AUC for all categories of scr

179 A new screening test has been developed but has not yet been v

180 To date, no cost-effective screening test has proven effective for reducing mortali

181 In only four years, this screening test has revolutionized prenatal care globally

182 the relative sensitivity and specificity of screening tests have not been fully resolved.

183 ompounds in a high throughput biodegradation screening test (HT-BST).

184 and recommends specific strategies based on screening test implementation.

185 It is unclear whether repeating a BMD screening test improves fracture risk assessment.

186 health were offered FDG-PET/CT scanning as a screening test in a comprehensive US cancer center from

187 hough HBA1c is an acceptable and widely used screening test in detecting IFG/IGT or NODAT, fructosami

188 ess the potential for VOC profiling as a new screening test in gastro-esophageal cancer.

189 resting 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) as a screening test in intermediate risk populations.

190 e sigmoidoscopy, or optical colonoscopy as a screening test in patients who are at average risk.

191 CP recommends using optical colonoscopy as a screening test in patients who are at high risk.

192 h patients with a reactive oral OraQuick HIV screening test in the emergency department had an 8- to

193 n strategies have a screening component, the screening test in the model was varied to reflect common

194 Colonoscopy has become the most common CRC screening test in the United States, but the degree to w

195 is the most underused evidence-based cancer screening test in the United States.

196 is the most commonly used colorectal cancer screening test in the United States.

197 cium scanning could be the first noninvasive screening test in these clinically high-risk diabetic pa

198 nd treatment for celiac disease, accuracy of screening tests in asymptomatic persons, and optimal scr

199 nd polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as weekly screening tests in high-risk populations.

200 as to examine the diagnostic accuracies of 4 screening tests in identifying impaired fasting glucose,

201 ds further research to evaluate osteoporosis screening tests in men.

202 dently associated with a positive depression screening test included body mass index > 40 kg/m2 (rela

203 Woman underwent multiple screening tests, including careHPV on clinician-collecte

204 Data on other screening tests, including radiography, and bone geometr

205 may allow for the premature diffusion of new screening tests into practice before higher-level eviden

206 When the screening test is applied to the average UK herd, the es

207 so a new accurate, efficient, cost-effective screening test is needed.

208 Increasing participation in fecal screening tests is a major challenge in countries that h

209 Commercial screening tests lack specificity and current diagnostic

210 ccurring when a hospital uses more expensive screening tests like polymerase chain reaction.

211 t candidates to anti-tumor necrosis factors [screening tests looking for hepatitis B virus and hepati

212 or SMA is not currently available, a newborn screening test may allow the child to be enrolled in a c

213 phthalmic technicians performing a subset of screening tests may provide an accurate and efficient me

214 disease in the general population, potential screening tests must provide very high specificity to av

215 hanges extend over time for PWID and whether screening test notification has behavioral impacts among

216 test characteristics and is suggested as the screening test of choice.

217 nters all over the world is carried out as a screening test of patients with high risk of colorectal

218 refusing colonoscopy accepted a non-invasive screening test of which 83% chose the Septin9 blood test

219 ed regular endocrine follow-up that included screening tests of thyroid function and stimulation test

220 Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests often have a trade-off between efficacy

221 rces used in a laboratory piloting a newborn screening test on Guthrie cards using the T-cell recepto

222 vidence was insufficient to prioritize among screening tests or evaluate newer tests, such as compute

223 es reported performance of colorectal cancer screening tests or health outcomes in average-risk popul

224 or screening, recommended target population, screening tests, or treatment thresholds exists.

225 The VDRL should not be recommended as a screening test owing to lack of sensitivity.

226 There were no studies of urine screening test performance conducted in asymptomatic pri

227 r each approach, we retrospectively reviewed screening test performance in 1614 patients referred for

228 statistic is a commonly reported measure of screening test performance.

229 nt-related morbidity; harms of breast cancer screening; test performance characteristics of digital b

230 ng the imaging sessions and laboratory blood screening tests performed before and after injection.

231 s in each of the major aspects of the visit (screening/testing, physician, waiting) was recorded.

232 Once outbreaks have been confirmed in screening-test positive herds, the following rounds of i

233 IBMFS is likely to reveal novel targets for screening tests, prognostic biomarkers, and improved and

234 times greater if they had a second trimester screening test (Quadruple test) and treated as positive

235 d in the likelihood of a positive depression screening test (relative risk 2.6, 95% confidence interv

236 nostic evaluation following a false-positive screening test result was associated with complications.

237 A positive screening test result was defined as a PSA level >4 ng/m

238 Participants with positive screening test results (cancer, adenoma, polyp >/=10 mm,

239 their health care practitioners received the screening test results and managed evaluation of abnorma

240 o determine the association between abnormal screening test results and visually significant eye dise

241 g-term adverse effects of false-positive PSA screening test results are unknown.

242 e despite repeatedly negative HIV-1 antibody screening test results.

243 rten the time between infection and reactive screening test results.

244 sed early detection do not prove that cancer screening tests save lives.

245 al advantages, including use of an automated screening test, saving on laboratory time and costs, as

246 We found that it performed best as a screening test (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 84%) to

247 The ideal screening test should be inexpensive, well tolerated, an

248 results also suggest that sensitive retinal screening tests should be added to ongoing and future cl

249 A new screening test showed good discrimination between patien

250 is highly sensitive to small fluctuations in screening test specificity.

251 at make it useful as a complement to popular screening tests such as Trolox equivalent antioxidant ca

252 Screening tests, such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessme

253 physicians were more enthusiastic about the screening test supported by irrelevant evidence (5-year

254 There is no effective screening test that has clearly shown a reduction in sti

255 is effective at early cancer detection and a screening test that is effective at both early cancer de

256 repared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that primarily is effective at early canc

257 cted German individuals by using a web-based screening test that was designed to assess their voice-r

258 e forces, and there are no rapid immunoassay screening tests that can detect the presence of those co

259 to molecular imaging of the dopamine system, screening tests that can potentially be used to identify

260 tribution ranged from 44 days for laboratory screening tests that detect both antigen and antibody to

261 h advanced cancer continue to undergo cancer screening tests that do not have a meaningful likelihood

262 l, some organizations and individuals prefer screening tests that offer the opportunity for cancer pr

263 pective study assessed whether two cognitive screening tests, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE

264 ilable evidence on the accuracy of serologic screening tests, the USPSTF concluded that the harms out

265 scenarios about the effect of 2 hypothetical screening tests: The effect was described as improved 5-

266 ation of nasal nitric oxide measurement as a screening test to define probable PCD cases and gene mut

267 used stored sera or a single cross sectional screening test to identify patients with DSA.

268 The optimal screening test to identify those with NODAT remains uncl

269 screen, how frequently to screen, and which screening test to use.

270 alth assessments can inform clinicians about screening tests to perform in new immigrants and help co

271 Based on batch screening tests, two commercially available biochars (BN

272 tion and American College of Cardiology as a screening test under certain circumstances.

273 is commonly made after chance findings from screening tests (urinary dipstick or blood tests), or wh

274 y; pooled sensitivities and specificities of screening tests using a hierarchical summary receiver op

275 For each cancer screening test, utilization rates were defined as the pe

276 827, negative predictive value = 84%) with 4 screening tests: visual acuity <20/40, abnormal/poor-qua

277 The principal screening test was carotid ultrasonography, and the inte

278 result, the Behavioral Visual Field (BEFIE) Screening Test was developed in 1995.

279 on the diagnostic accuracy of visual acuity screening tests was limited and consistent with previous

280 The accuracy of the screening tests was summarized by the area under the ROC

281 The sensitivity and specificity of the DR screening test were assessed in comparison with diagnosi

282 rs Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) screening test were e-mailed to 14,991 students aged 17

283 en (mean [SD] age, 39.8 [12.5] years) with a screening test were recorded between 2008 and 2012, and

284 n belief that TVU or CA-125 was an effective screening test were the strongest predictors of physicia

285 Three higher order visual processing screening tests were administered since previous researc

286 Four malaria screening tests were compared to assess their usefulness

287 Most studies of the accuracy of screening tests were from populations with high HSV-2 pr

288 The accuracy and harms of screening tests were reviewed after only a single applic

289 Screening tests were stratified by ophthalmic subspecial

290 ficacy, benefits, and harms of supplementary screening tests were studied and consensus reached.

291 patients on dialysis and the extent to which screening tests were targeted toward patients at lower r

292 ear to be at risk for receiving fewer cancer screening tests when compared to individuals without RA.

293 our study population with initially negative screening tests who will be diagnosed with acute coronar

294 Screening tests with a high yield are appropriate for ri

295 Screening tests with negligible/negative (< 1%) yield in

296 Elimination of screening tests with negligible/negative yield should be

297 We also determined the predictive value of screening tests with ocular disease.

298 creening mammography to discuss supplemental screening tests with their providers.

299 ethod would be potentially useful as a rapid screening test without the need for purification and den

300 Since a hypothetical screening test would be applied during antecedent clinic