ライフサイエンスコーパス: blind

1 e and may preclude vision restoration in the blind.

2 n was randomized, counterbalanced and single blinded.

3 fastest reading-speeds, probably due to less blinding.

4 ring committee (DMC), and 50.6% incorporated blinding.

5 In this randomized, double-blind, 2-dose gluten-challenge trial conducted in 2 US c

6 A single-blind, 3-arm, randomized controlled trial was conducted

7 We did two double-blind, active-controlled studies (now in open-label exte

8 TARGET was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, p

9 ted by a panel of hematologists performing a blind analysis of blood smears from healthy donors and t

10 Using double-blind analysis, we assessed the presence of signs favori

11 supports object-color knowledge in both the blind and sighted groups, indicating the existence of a

12 orical responses in the VOTC of congenitally blind and sighted people that partially match the topogr

13 stages (mild, moderate, advanced, severe or blind) and death as health states.

14 patient-reported findings on home tests, no blinding, and no assessment of whether masks could decre

15 Data were obtained through blinded ascertainment of trial clinical and safety datab

16 on on a P2Y(12) inhibitor were randomized to blinded aspirin or placebo and to open-label apixaban or

17 f Protein Structure Prediction(5) (CASP13)-a blind assessment of the state of the field-AlphaFold cre

18 n New Zealand using open-label treatment and blinded assessment of radiological and clinical outcomes

19 re reviewed and scored by an experienced and blinded, board-certified abdominal radiologist.

20 Simulation benchmarks, blind challenges, compensatory mutagenesis, cross-RNA ho

21 ion of SARS-CoV-2 in biological media, while blind clinical evaluations of 100 suspected samples furt

22 This is a randomized and double-blind clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of miltefo

23 randomized 40 SCZ non-smokers into a double-blind clinical trial with four groups: placebo, 5 mg/d,

24 In this parallel-group, double-blind clinical trial, participants were randomized to re

25 s with relapsing-remitting MS, who underwent blinded clinical and 3 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI

26 A community-based single-blind cluster-randomized controlled superiority trial wa

27 and then conducted internal validation on a blind cohort from the same healthcare system (1850 opera

28 erative events) and external validation on a blind cohort from the second healthcare system (15,360 o

29 We conducted a randomized, observer-blind, comparator-controlled (trivalent high-dose inacti

30 the retina and therapeutic interventions for blinding conditions.

31 s an ongoing prospective, randomized, single-blind, controlled trial in 1,002 coronary heart disease

32 In this 24-week, phase 3, double-blind, controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients i

33 We conducted a multisite, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial to examine the effectiveness o

34 Here we report on a double-blinded, controlled trial, where 161 healthy normotensiv

35 rnea, with implications for the treatment of blinding corneal disease.

36 ational component of the trial, a clinically blinded coronary CTA was conducted prior to ICA in both

37 nistration of ketamine 0.5 mg/kg in a double-blind cross-over design with treatment days separated by

38 ucose tolerance test in a randomized, single-blind, cross-over design in 15 healthy lean men.

39 This larger double-blind crossover study that included healthy controls inv

40 n = 64) participated in a randomized, double-blind, crossover intervention.

41 2 separate 4-wk, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover trials, 50 healthy adults with low diet

42 In a double-blind design, 70 healthy volunteers were randomly alloca

43 Retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is a debilitating blinding disease affecting over 1.5 million people world

44 advance our understanding of the etiology of blinding diseases, we used single-cell RNA-sequencing (s

45 ions, or aging is the principal pathology of blinding diseases.

46 sent in food exhibit advantageous effects in blinding diseases.

47 strophy to spastic paraplegia to a childhood blinding disorder to bone deformations.

48 e and there is currently no therapy for this blinding disorder.

49 In blinding disorders such as glaucoma, RGCs are the main c

50 from an ongoing placebo-controlled, observer-blinded dose-escalation study (ClinicalTrials.gov identi

51 Participants were exposed to three different blinded doses of intranasally administered nicotine (0,

52 We conducted a 26-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 2 trial to investigate the ef

53 A randomised controlled non-blinded eight-arm crossover study was used to assess pla

54 G, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, open-label, blinded end-point clinical trial including 160 patients

55 e did a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, non-inferiority trial of febuxostat ve

56 In a context-aware blind evaluation by human judges, CUBBITT significantly

57 ting severe LATE-NC from FTLD-TDP cases with blind evaluation was ~90%.

58 In this randomized, double-blind, event-driven trial, we assigned 4822 patients who

59 We conducted a phase 3 multicenter, double-blind, event-driven, randomized-withdrawal trial of rilo

60 e to colorimetric or presumptive tests, in a blind fashion.

61 ss under the present-day trace of the MFT as blind faults inaccessible to trenching, and that paleose

62 Blinding for atezolizumab was achieved by means of an id

63 , phase 2 noninferiority trial with observer blinding for osocimab doses, conducted at 54 hospitals i

64 ans of an identical intravenous placebo, and blinding for vemurafenib was achieved by means of a plac

65 anax are found in surface rivers and derived blind forms are found in cave systems.

66 y occur to cause recurrent diseases, such as blinding herpetic stromal keratitis.

67 In this context, the benefits of CEC in blinded HF trials should be reconsidered.

68 o a patient's treatment allocation until the blinded independent central review (BICR) showed progres

69 point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR); additional as

70 edian progression-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review, versus the chemother

71 nt was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review.

72 ssion-free survival in cohort A according to blinded independent central review.

73 arison of performance, CA19-9 was assayed in blinded independent sets of samples collected at diagnos

74 n the use of un-bias patient cohorts, double-blinded index test and detection assays that do not requ

75 ent of this area for non-visual functions in blind individuals [2, 3].

76 erns in early "visual" areas of congenitally blind individuals who lack visual imagery.

77 presented acoustically in sighted and early blind individuals, and visually in a separate sighted gr

78 , NIH = 58.9%, Other = 60.8%; P < 0.001) and blinded (Industry = 57.2%, NIH = 42.7%, Other = 43.5%; P

79 ain tolerance before and 40-min after double-blind injection of .08 mg/kg morphine or placebo.

80 This was a two-centre, randomized, blinded international study, using translational imaging

81 of imaging tests increased, and the rate of "blind" laparotomies decreased.

82 E quantum memory is realized in a completely blind manner without any information about the input qua

83 demonstrate the assessment reliability in a blinded, multi-site clinical study on children 18-72 mon

84 In this blinded, multicenter RCT, patients scheduled for electiv

85 Cardiovascular RisK) is a randomized, double-blind, multinational trial comparing monthly subcutaneou

86 to thrombectomy, assessed by consensus of 2 blinded neuroradiologists.

87 nvestigator-initiated, parallel-group, open, blinded-outcome-assessment trial, we randomly assigned p

88 ARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial conducted at 74 intensive ca

89 e 2, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trial, we randomly assigned, in a

90 is was a phase II placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, enriched enrollment randomized wi

91 AIN was an international, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicentre p

92 In this single-centre, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised trial, patients with a

93 TTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial of 775

94 We conducted a pragmatic, outcome-assessor-blinded, parallel-group randomised trial in 3 Australian

95 In this randomised, blinded, parallel-group, pragmatic equivalence trial, me

96 in the lateral fusiform gyrus of individual blind participants during haptic exploration of stimuli,

97 rms were presented and recognized rapidly by blind participants, up to 86 forms per minute.

98 lor perception along the blue-yellow axis in blind patients with RP by electrically stimulating the r

99 In blind patients, although the electrical activation of th

100 ve, resistant, and intermediate) across four blinded PDX Development and Trial Centers using independ

101 nd decreasing airflow velocity, and alerting blind people walking outside about potential hazard indu

102 In the double-blind period, median progression-free survival was 6.3 m

103 ted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind pharmacological study testing the impact of three

104 We performed a double-blind phase 2 trial of 104 patients with NAFLD in the Un

105 curative intent were included in our double-blind phase III multicenter trial.

106 The double-blind phase was due to last until 44 protocol-defined re

107 In the double-blind phase, similar proportions of patients in each gro

108 -defined relapse or at the end of the double-blind phase.

109 Here, we report primary results from a blinded phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety

110 from an ongoing placebo-controlled, observer-blinded phase I/II coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) v

111 In this ongoing, double-blind, phase 1-3 trial involving nonhospitalized patient

112 In this double-blind, phase 2b/3 trial, adults (aged 18-75 years), with

113 ously, findings from CheckMate 238, a double-blind, phase 3 adjuvant trial in patients with resected

114 this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, done in 209 sites in 29 countries,

115 In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, adult

116 Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

117 This randomised, double-blind, phase 3, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial co

118 CIPANTS: Randomized, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, phase 2 noninferiority trial with observer blin

119 Skin tests (STs) and single-blind placebo-controlled drug provocation tests (SBPCDPT

120 lacebo to asthmatics in a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled investigation.

121 A phase 1-2 randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial enrolled 252 participants

122 We performed the first randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to evaluate efficacy of i

123 Methods: In a multicenter, randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, we studied retreatment w

124 We conducted a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial to determine the effect

125 5/23 received leronlimab after blinded placebo-controlled trials of remdesivir, sarilum

126 This Phase I, randomized, observer-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study evaluated an

127 s.(9) In a preregistered, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover design in 25 healthy

128 liflozin and placebo in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study.

129 A pilot double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial was conducted

130 In this double-blind, placebo-controlled experimental medicine study, h

131 13.5% (19 of 141) tolerated the full double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge of 5444 mg.

132 This double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial compared progre

133 performed a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in 39 UK hosp

134 anage Acute Coronary Syndromes) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial conducted fro

135 s single-center, phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigated the safety,

136 In a Phase I, randomized, partial double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 36 malaria-naive adul

137 This was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomizing subjects to

138 This phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was done at 118 sites in

139 In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we investigated whether

140 table bowel syndrome in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

141 2/Delta1313/I1314L was evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (vaccine-placebo ratio,

142 a multicentre, phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 92 sites in the USA.

143 In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolling females with d

144 This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which patients with s

145 This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial included patients with t

146 FOURIER was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with

147 test this, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of pioglitazone therapy

148 This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vitamin D(3) suppleme

149 We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess whether intrav

150 A factorial, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in inferti

151 We hence conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with newly diagnosed T2D

152 TING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, conducted at 190 sites

153 We performed a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, from March 2016 through

154 S-II is an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

155 ipants volunteered in this randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, between-group study.

156 male) completed a phase-1 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study to examine do

157 BE ACTIVE was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging phase 2b study d

158 MAVERICK-HCM trial was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging phase II study i

159 We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial involving

160 We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial of trimeta

161 ND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2b randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial of 789 pati

162 s investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, patients w

163 Following a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group design, we uti

164 In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 1 study,

165 In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, we enrolled pa

166 NTS: CAPACITY HFpEF was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

167 This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study included patien

168 COMBI-AD is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial comparing dabra

169 BROCADE3 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done at 147 hos

170 In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly as

171 Using a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized crossover design,

172 We designed this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial to determine

173 In a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, time course SLIT study, PBMCs

174 A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover study was c

175 A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover intervention stud

176 without diabetes were recruited for a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study including 6

177 Healthy volunteers were enrolled in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study, and periph

178 This investigator-initiated, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized trial enrolled 7

179 high-quality models in the recent rounds of blind protein-protein docking competition CAPRI (Critica

180 he results of the present study confirm that blind pulling and verbal reports are independently influ

181 During blind pulling, subjects underestimated horizontal distan

182 Two blinded radiologists visually and qualitatively scored c

183 We enrolled double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

184 In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial (JADE MONO-1), patients

185 AFFIRM-AHF was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised trial done at 121 sites in Europe, Sou

186 report of the phase 2 component of a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial (COV002),

187 This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done in

188 mg zolpidem or placebo according to a double-blind, randomised, cross-over design.

189 HPTN 077 was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2a trial don

190 For this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study done in 48 a

191 In this international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (D-

192 In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, we

193 In this multicentre double-blind randomized clinical trial, we investigated the eff

194 This study was a parallel, dual-arm, double-blind randomized controlled trial.

195 FMT-TRIM was a 12-week double-blind randomized placebo-controlled pilot trial of oral

196 r-term AVF patency, we performed an observer-blinded randomized controlled trial at three university

197 This prospective randomized double blinded randomized controlled trial has revealed a signi

198 In a double-blinded randomized sequence, participants consumed 750 m

199 In a patient-assessor-blind, randomized and sham controlled trial, 90 depressi

200 investigator-initiated, multicenter, single-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted at 5 referral

201 trial was a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial enrolling 881 patients

202 Six-month double-blind, randomized clinical trial in which participants w

203 ngioplasty; NCT01121224) prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

204 We conducted two double-blind, randomized crossover experiments in which healthy

205 n CKD, we conducted a parallel-group, double-blind, randomized trial in participants aged 18 or older

206 In this double-blind, randomized trial, we recruited 88 hospitalized pa

207 A 12-week, double-blind, randomized, controlled proof-of-concept trial of

208 We conducted a double-blind, randomized, counterbalanced, crossover study comp

209 unrestrained eaters participated in a double-blind, randomized, crossover study at a contract researc

210 e analyzed as secondary outcomes of a double-blind, randomized, milk-based vitamin D intervention tri

211 We conducted a single-center, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trial in patients with

212 We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled noninferiority tri

213 In this completed, observer-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase I trial (NCT

214 We conducted an international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, r

215 Part 1 was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, single ascending

216 In the present double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled trial, 105 patients w

217 dolescents with TS were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled, crossover study invo

218 TTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial at 20 trauma centers

219 py and after the conclusion of therapy, were blinded, randomized, and scored independently by 2 radio

220 ers (15 females) participated in this double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

221 -week, single-center, parallel-group, double-blind RCT and randomized into 4 arms (n = 23): HP-diet a

222 remaining 71 BCS patients were included in a blinded reader study, which resulted in 69.0% sensitivit

223 34.48 kg/m2, SD = 4.87) and randomised by a blinded researcher.

224 In this multicentre, double-blind, response-adaptive, randomised controlled trial, w

225 oreceptor function or morphogenesis leads to blinding retinal degenerative diseases, the majority of

226 A blinded review of 10% of the "possible" group, consideri

227 y of partially restoring color perception in blind RP patients, with the aim to provide chromatic inf

228 ing further evaluated with a large cohort of blinded samples from the CDC and Columbia University.

229 th previous results for both the control and blinded samples.

230 se recurrent reactivation events can lead to blinding scarring of the cornea.

231 Our results, from a blinded screening, show 100% specificity and ~ 58% sensi

232 PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter randomized double-blind sequential trial conducted in France, with interim

233 CA19-9 levels were assessed in blinded sera from 175 subjects collected up to 5 years b

234 nitiation.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT This double-blind sham-controlled study suggested that neurofeedback

235 Double-blinded sham-controlled trials are needed to confirm the

236 of this study was to examine TBE in a single-blind, sham procedure randomized trial.

237 Lastly, we propose a semi-blind sparse affine spectral unmixing (SSASU) algorithm

238 This allows us to overcome the "blind sphere" in paramagnetic proteins, and to observe a

239 ties associated with honey bees, which was a blind spot in research up until now.

240 from stage X (central/paracentral, enlarged blind spot, and scatter).

241 ization-each have critical and complementary blind spots under these conditions.

242 We found that our single blind study using eight liver tissue-specific gene bioma

243 S to correctly classify three compounds in a blinded study and identified an off-target effect for on

244 In a double-blinded study with 132 pond water samples, we establish

245 The blinded subspecialist had concordant interpretations for

246 were recruited and randomly provided with a blinded supply of lozenges to be consumed twice daily fo

247 Ninety-day outcomes were evaluated by blinded telephone interviewers.

248 sing longer time scales, larger actions, and blind testing, enabling more of biology's stories to be

249 In blind testing, no ART was detected in 300 infection-nonr

250 across cross-validation and two independent blind tests, achieving Pearson's correlations of up to 0

251 were, however, more reliably encoded in the blind than the sighted group, using a representational f

252 studies was variable, and only three studies blinded the ultrasound findings to the clinicians.

253 ent and sustained for the duration of double-blind therapy.

254 Parents, children, and dentists were not blind to allocated arm.

255 entified, cascade family screening followed, blind to immunologic results.

256 lysis of both scans was performed by a rater blind to the participant group.

257 e conducted by two different operators, each blind to the results of the other assay.

258 All laboratory investigators were blind to treatment and participant allocation.

259 Two neuroradiologists blinded to clinical and radiological information analyze

260 Two radiologists blinded to clinical information assessed EPE according t

261 nd images were read by four readers who were blinded to clinical information.

262 dence-based framework, 3 gene curation teams blinded to each other's work scored the level of evidenc

263 nly 2 (7.7%) require that their decisions be blinded to ethically irrelevant considerations.

264 llowship-trained breast imaging radiologists blinded to final histologic findings interpreted DBT exa

265 from predefined standard areas of the brain, blinded to MRI findings.

266 ely assessed by 2 attending breast surgeons, blinded to operator identity, using a video-based assess

267 Two experts reviewed images blinded to patient outcome.

268 Autopsies were performed blinded to PET results.

269 hole-body MRI, or bone scintigraphy and were blinded to results with the other modalities.

270 atment allocation in the first 12 weeks, and blinded to the dose of bimekizumab thereafter.

271 od and use of outcome assessors who were not blinded to the group allocation.

272 pecialist physician (reference standard) was blinded to the outcome of the initial UNIP evaluation an

273 reviewed by an abdominal radiologist who was blinded to the pathological results.

274 CT images were analyzed by two radiologists blinded to the RT-PCR results.

275 l assessment with the UNIP (index test) were blinded to the study, and the pain specialist physician

276 = 19) once daily for 12 weeks were evaluated blinded to time point, subject, and clinical information

277 Both participants and researchers were blinded to treatment allocation in the first 12 weeks, a

278 leting the GAF domain from PtsP makes cells "blind" to the cellular nitrogen status.

279 per month in the last 4 weeks of the double-blind treatment phase (weeks 9-12).

280 placebo every other day for 12 weeks (double-blind treatment phase).

281 ference between treatment arms during double-blind treatment, but during the open-label period, more

282 After 6 weeks of blinded treatment, improvement in the least-squares mean

283 We performed a multicenter, double-blind trial in which patients with type 2 diabetes melli

284 We conducted a double-blind trial of SER-287 in 58 adults with active mild-to-

285 In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 5734 patients with CKD

286 In this phase 2b, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned adults with plaque pso

287 titutes of Health-funded, randomized, single-blinded trial conducted in 12 centers in the United Stat

288 n this randomized, active-controlled, double-blinded trial, 444 adults 60 through 64 years of age wer

289 was conducted for 3 doravirine (DOR) double-blind trials (Phase IIb: P007 [NCT01632345]; Phase III:

290 r basic pH 8.5 or pH 5.5) was applied double-blinded twice daily to 6 AD patients and 6 healthy (HE)

291 A multicenter, randomized, single-blind, two-arm, parallel Phase-3 study was conducted.

292 strategy for restoring useful vision to the blind, under the assumption that visual percepts of smal

293 fection-nonreactive donors were tested under blind using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectromet

294 With a training cohort (n = 40) and a blinded validation cohort (n = 90) acquired from CDC, th

295 rate in the detection of seroconversion in a blinded validation cohort of samples collected before th

296 ble cardiometabolic risk markers, but double-blinded vitamin D intervention studies in children are s

297 randomized during their second trimester to blinded weekly doses of placebo or 4,200, 16,800, or 28,

298 All study personnel were blinded with the exception of the phlebotomist.

299 DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A double-blind, within-participants, randomized clinical trial wa

300 t S-ketamine in a placebo-controlled, double-blind, within-subject fashion.