ライフサイエンスコーパス: sham treatment

1 ct axons, respectively (P < 0.05 compared to sham treatment).

2 nd PVD with less anti-VEGF use compared with sham treatment.

3 pacing at baseline and after 1 h of LLTS or sham treatment.

4 e subjected to full-thickness burn injury or sham treatment.

5 D at month 12 with ocriplasmin compared with sham treatment.

6 ght temporoparietal area was not superior to sham treatment.

7 th the 12- and 24-month visits compared with sham treatment.

8 affected eyes through 6 months compared with sham treatment.

9 oclonal antibody, antibody plus ramipril, or sham treatment.

10 and after ONC in animals receiving rtACS or sham treatment.

11 ding increased tumor size when compared with sham treatment.

12 K), compared with uptake in mice receiving a sham treatment.

13 0% total body surface area burn or a control sham treatment.

14 s -2 and -1) compared with prior episodes of sham treatment.

15 ment compared with 1 of 17 (5.9%) courses of sham treatment.

16 nar nuclei (ILN) and midline nuclei (MLN) or sham treatment.

17 stimulation significantly improved mood over sham treatment.

18 20 Hz at 80% motor threshold) and 2 weeks of sham treatment.

19 tion, or microvascular density compared with sham treatment.

20 e mice received 10 Gy cranial irradiation or sham-treatment.

21 P=0.015) and 16 weeks (P=0.04) compared with sham treatments.

22 SCs, mesenchymal stem cells, native ECs, and sham treatments.

23 uge puncture [18G], 100%; 21G, 50%; 25G, 5%; sham treatment, 0%).

24 ing at 60% peak aerobic power (VO2,peak)) or sham treatment (60 min seated rest) in nine healthy subj

25 The mean difference was 6.9 mm favoring sham treatment (95% CI, -3.9 to 17.7).

26 Three hours after initial cytokine or sham treatment, all mice received SPIO by intravenous in

27 mulation continues to display superiority to sham treatment and benefits similar to antimuscarinic th

28 ated) tubulins were increased, compared with sham treatment, and only Paxceed ameliorated motor impai

29 F-alpha gene transcription 4- to 5-fold over sham treatment, and TNF-alpha gene transcription increas

30 After 2-h stimulation and sham treatment, animals were perfused with 4% paraformal

31 were exposed to an activating dose of IR or sham treatment as control, and nuclear extracts were ana

32 r treatments and 1 additional DEX implant or sham treatment as needed.

33 provements in mean DR severity compared with sham treatment at months 6, 12, and 18.

34 ntion, 10 participants (71.4%) randomized to sham treatment believed they had received WBH compared w

35 Delayed treatment in patients receiving sham treatment did not seem to result in the same extent

36 Anesthesia and sham treatments did not modify females' discrimination o

37 Control animals had 3 days of sham treatment followed by a hyperinsulinemic/hypoglycem

38 rTMS versus sham treatment for AVH yielded a mean weighted effect si

39 bserved following LFMS treatment relative to sham treatment for both diagnostic subgroups for our pri

40 than in the nonoperated control eyes in the sham treatment group and no treatment group only.

41 The sham treatment group received inactive electrodes for 30

42 n patients (37%; 95% CI, 25.9%-48.1%) in the sham treatment group vs 32 (23%; 95% CI, 15.8%-29.6%) in

43 9) units, whereas the baseline score for the sham treatment group was 32.4 (8.4) units and the week-1

44 were randomized into an oxygenation group, a sham treatment group, and a no treatment group.

45 reated with StomaphyX and 29 patients in the sham treatment group.

46 changes were observed for the apheresis- and sham-treatment groups for endoscopic remission and respo

47 ranulocyte/monocyte apheresis (n = 112)- and sham-treatment groups, respectively (n = 56; P = .361).

48 DAPP mice at 2, 5, and 8 months after TBI or sham treatment (i.e., at 6, 9, and 12 months of age).

49 and safety of this regimen as compared with sham treatment in 807 infants in need of respiratory sup

50 and tolerability of such PDL treatment with sham treatment in patients with facial inflammatory acne

51 shown that sphincterotomy is no better than sham treatment in patients with post-cholecystectomy pai

52 Sham treatment included inactive ultrasound and inert ge

53 ait schemes and sublethal RFA (n = 52), or a sham treatment (n = 18).

54 ngle (n = 15) or repetitive (n = 39) mTBI or sham treatment (n = 37).

55 randomly assigned patients to PDL (n=31) or sham treatment (n=10).

56 r and that ethanol may modify the effects of sham treatment on gene expression, as well as inducing s

57 The effect of pridopidine versus sham treatment on genome-wide expression profiling in th

58 vision of at least 20/40 than patients given sham treatment or PDT.

59 Male Sprague-Dawley rats given sham treatment or treatment as a burn model with full-th

60 Anaesthetized pigs were subjected to either sham treatment, or an abrupt increase in cardiac workloa

61 /- 9 mm at baseline versus 13 +/- 5 mm after sham treatment (p < 0.001).

62 t treatment and by 0.44 (SD, 1.4) points for sham treatment (P = .90).

63 mprovement in pain or function compared with sham treatment, raising questions about its value for th

64 Antecedent hypoglycemia, compared with sham treatment, resulted in diminished epinephrine respo

65 Resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starch and sham treatment significantly decreased FIBTEM maximum cl

66 hypoglycemia (days -2 and -1) compared with sham treatment significantly enhanced baseline adrenal S

67 gle in vivo HT (41 degrees C, for 20 min) or sham treatment (ST).

68 uncture is significantly more effective than sham treatment (standardized mean difference, 0.54 [95%

69 cale scores decreased 5 points, while during sham treatment the scores increased or worsened by 3 poi

70 With sham treatment, TTc transport causes fluorescent signal

71 s were given a course of eight spaced ECS or sham treatments under either halothane or ketamine anaes

72 nted sites were randomized to sonotherapy or sham treatment using a custom-built, 8-French catheter i

73 ndomized to receive either hemoadsorption or sham treatment using an arterial-venous circuit.

74 trials of 9 nonpharmacologic options versus sham treatment, wait list, or usual care, or of 1 nonpha

75 ECS (50 mA for 0.2 s) or sham treatment was administered once weekly to male N171

76 with MSC-VSVG treatment versus MSC alone or sham treatment was associated with decreased MSC retenti

77 enocarcinoma tumors were allocated to RFA or sham treatment with or without a STAT3 inhibitor (S3I-20

78 xt, animals were allocated to hepatic RFA or sham treatment with or without STAT3 (signal transducer