戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (right1)

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                                 Maximum standardized uptake values were calculated.
2  for the target ISO and GDC components, into theoretical EO values were calculated.
3   Area under the curve and positive and negative predictive values were calculated.
4 l nerve fiber layer (RNFL), and ganglion cell complex (GCC) values were calculated.
5                                      Epidemiological cutoff values were calculated and determined to be 256 mug/ml and 51
6                               For guaiacol, the Km and Vmax values were calculated as 24.88mM and 3.23EU/mL, respectively
7                                   For H2O2, the Km and Vmax values were calculated as 3.247mM and 0.799EU/mL, respectivel
8  sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated as 98.1, 94.4, 94.5, and 98.1 %, respe
9                        Cortical (11)C-Pittsburgh compound B values were calculated as a standard uptake value ratio norma
10                                                  Diagnostic values were calculated at different probabilities.
11                                      Laboratory test cutoff values were calculated based on receiver operating characteri
12                                                       kappa Values were calculated between seven readers and with a 3-mon
13 Additionally, corrected pore-water-concentration-based EC50 values were calculated by equilibrium partitioning using soil
14 ce intervals were obtained by using bootstrap resampling; P values were calculated by using a t test.
15 se and insulin were monitored for 5 h postingestion, and GI values were calculated by using different area under the curv
16 for 2 h, and measured meal GI and GL and insulin index (II) values were calculated by using the incremental area under th
17 ic, associative, and sensorimotor), averaged regional kicer values were calculated, compared across groups, and correlate
18                                         Central field index values were calculated for 176 eyes of 142 patients.
19                         For this reason, 2 different cutoff values were calculated for age groups 4-10 and 11-18.
20 on rates, sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values were calculated for both mammography and MR imaging.
21                                                CT perfusion values were calculated for both series by using the maximum s
22                                                   Mean grey values were calculated for each group after measuring the gre
23                                                         ADC values were calculated for each organ on each sequence using
24                                       Concordance and kappa values were calculated for each primary endpoint.
25                                                       kappa Values were calculated for inter-observer agreement.
26                                                         HEI values were calculated for participants in the 1999-2002 NHAN
27                            Positive and negative predictive values were calculated for progression-free survival.
28                                                        Mean values were calculated for the cohort.
29                                       The Ki-, G-, H- and F values were calculated for the estimation of the level of fis
30                                                Strain index values were calculated for the head, body, and tail of the pa
31                                                  Cellular S values were calculated for varying cell and nucleus radii, an
32                                                  Mean T1rho values were calculated from liver regions of interest.
33                                        Intraocular pressure values were calculated from the deep learning-predicted tonom
34                                                     Similar values were calculated from the two-proton P(+)-Fe(III)(OH2)2
35                                                  Tumor MATH values were calculated from WES results.
36 . fractional anisotropy, mean, axial and radial diffusivity values were calculated in both grey and white matter of spina
37          Anatomic structures were segmented, and median R2* values were calculated in the neocortex and cortical lobes, b
38 a under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) values were calculated per group (Sens, Spec, AUROC): frozen
39                                                    Baseline values were calculated per tissue combining all mAbs without
40 e were obtained, the minimum detectable and quantifiable ee values were calculated, the technique was applied to an asymm
41                        Odds ratios (ORs) and Fisher exact P values were calculated to assess risk factors associated with
42                            Activity-to-exposure ratio (AER) values were calculated to compare relative risks of activatin
43                                                       kappa values were calculated to determine reliability.
44                                                          T1 values were calculated using a curve-fitting algorithm on ave
45                           Nondisplaceable binding potential values were calculated using the cerebellum as a reference re
46                                                           P values were calculated using the chi(2) test.
47                                                         ULN values were calculated using the cutoff levels suggested by t
48 sitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated using urine culture as the gold standa
49 r the known-volume group, average lesion-absorbed dose (AD) values were calculated, whereas for the small-volume group a
50                              GI, GL, and insulin index (II) values were calculated with the use of the incremental area u