ライフサイエンスコーパス: grading

1 OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95 using disc image grading).

2 ereas no difference was identified for tumor grading.

3 cancer detection, localisation, and Gleason grading.

4 terdam criteria and 0.3% based on disc image grading.

5 nd 7 (0.5%) had glaucoma based on disc image grading.

6 all NEN grades and is superior to histologic grading.

7 s compared with the consensus and individual grading.

8 d loss, based on the Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson grading.

9 universally accepted gold standard or expert grading.

10 ege of American Pathologist (CAP) regression grading.

11 ts, version 4.03, was used for adverse event grading.

12 he scans separately then reached a consensus grading.

13 ediction compared with currently established grading.

14 e observer bias and increase accuracy of PCO grading.

15 omated deep learning model over manual human grading.

16 clear color cataracts as defined by LOCS III grading.

17 f Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and ejaculation grading.

18 e a new method for standardization of Risser grading.

19 PET imaging and compared it with histologic grading.

20 s (66.6%) with sufficient-quality images for grading, 147 (69.7%) did not develop referral-warranted

21 For grading, 34 (11.7%) were classified as Grade A, 193 (66.

22 As per surgical complexity grading, 71 (14.4%) cases were lower grade (I-III) and 4

23 I for mean difference: 0.6 +/- 1.7), in EPCO grading (95% CI for mean difference: - 0.2 +/- 1.5), in

24 difference: 0.5 +/- 1.2) than in subjective grading (95% CI for mean difference: 0.6 +/- 1.7), in EP

25 for mean difference: - 0.2 +/- 1.5), in POCO grading (95% CI for mean difference: 1.6 +/- 2.7) and in

26 To provide a clinical grading according to the Gertzbein scale, pedicle screw

27 Compared to the GS, SKIE achieved a grading accuracy of 90% and substantial agreement (linea

28 The overall AUC of SS-OCT manual grading against gonioscopy was 0.84 (95% confidence inte

29 cannot be predicted by tumor volume or Koos grading alone.

30 comes were defined at discharge by clinician grading and at 2 years by the Pediatric Stroke Outcome M

31 tivity showed strong correlation with AO-OCT grading and cone density (rho values > 0.750).

32 tivity showed strong correlation with AO-OCT grading and cone density (rho-values >.750).

33 tool for profiling cancer cells for clinical grading and development of patient-specific therapeutic

34 Both SDOCT grading and microperimetry sensitivity showed strong cor

35 Both, SD-OCT grading and microperimetry sensitivity showed strong cor

36 rgan-specific toxicity criteria for severity grading and provided prophylaxis and treatment considera

37 There was no difference in sputum smear grading and pulmonary cavitation.

38 idity was determined by including subjective grading and repeatability was determined by evaluating t

39 e mid and long-term after-effects of machine-grading and revegetation when compared to undisturbed si

40 stologic evaluation is the gold standard for grading and staging, but invasive biopsies are associate

41 perties and the long-term effects of machine-grading and subsequent restoration of ski runs so as to

42 nvolved airway can enhance histopathological grading and suggest immunoprevention strategies for inte

43 tage B-C and ejection fraction<50%, with FTR grading and systolic pulmonary artery pressure estimatio

44 expression correlates positively with tumor grading and the presence of lymph node as well as distan

45 es between progression rates using automated grading and those using manual grading (beta = .09; P =

46 uated by radiologic IVD height, histological grading, and biomechanical testing.

47 ognostic capabilities of variables (staging, grading, and Extent) included in the new classification.

48 ibute a second opinion, aid in standardising grading, and provide pathology expertise in parts of the

49 on of guidelines for the diagnosis, severity grading, and treatment of sinusoidal obstructive syndrom

50 curacy of quantitative metrics, using visual grading as the reference standard.

51 riants, in addition to the clinical severity grading at baseline as quantified by validated drusen de

52 vides a molecular basis for SCG pathological grading based on differential miRNA expression.

53 ing automated grading and those using manual grading (beta = .09; P = .461).

54 However, conventional grading can be subjective and imprecise, impacting the e

55 Nonphysician image grading can detect almost all plus disease with good spe

56 a-observer and inter-observer variability in grading can result in overtreatment and undertreatment o

57 However, unified grading criteria for rejection in swine skin have not ye

58 When comparing both SD-OCT grading criteria with FAF, CFP, and IR, there were no st

59 Koos grading did not show a significant impact on tumor contr

60 s defined as lymph node (LN) involvement, G3 grading, distant metastases, and/or recurrence.

61 , time-efficient approach for extracting and grading eMS is possible and appears valid.

62 Attendees undertook premeeting grading exercises that were reviewed during the meeting

63 Interestingly, visual grading for EEG abnormalities that are thought to reflec

64 The sensitivity and specificity of image grading for plus disease were calculated using the clini

65 On multivariate analysis, grading G2 (OR 6.98), lymphovascular infiltration (OR 8.

66 Grading G2 [odds ratio (OR) 6.04], lymphovascular infilt

67 Tumor size >15.5 mm, grading G2, and presence of lymphovascular infiltration

68 the first paediatric diagnostic and severity grading guidelines for sinusoidal obstructive syndrome,

69 Clinical features plus MRI grading had the highest diagnostic performance for predi

70 used as the gold standard for diagnosing and grading hepatic steatosis.

71 Criteria have been accepted as a system for grading histological rejection in graft skin in human va

72 Criteria have been accepted as a system for grading histological rejection in graft skin in human Va

73 These features were then assessed by masked grading in an "evaluation" cohort of AMD eyes with large

74 However, precise grading in bladder cancer is critical for therapeutic de

75 ce and point-to-point correspondence between gradings in GA area measurements between NIR and FAF wer

76 8 mm significantly increased as keratoconus grading increased (P < .001).

77 ckness central 3 mm decreased as keratoconus grading increased (P = .002).

78 Structural grading is a better predictor of future VA than quantita

79 Currently, grading is based on histologically assessed degree of tu

80 osclerosis and fibrosis; therefore, accurate grading is critical for tracking treatment effectiveness

81 well fisheye lens using parallel plate index grading is presented in this study to develop a passive

82 ue, not only in diagnosing LVDD, but also in grading its severity and in monitoring the effects of tr

83 ments of two or more steps between duplicate gradings, led to some improvement in reproducibility for

84 e single-sided magnetic-resonance sensor for grading liver steatosis and fibrosis using diffusion-wei

85 in tumors is largely independent of staging, grading, metastasis, and/or driver mutations.

86 The automatic grading method obtained a kappa coefficient of 0.72, whi

87 Diastolic function grading might improve risk stratification for AD.

88 ocardiographic algorithm was implemented for grading mitral regurgitation severity during the screeni

89 A fully automated detection and grading network based on deep learning is proposed to en

90 xclusions were no information on optic nerve grading; no 3MSE scores at the time of the eye examinati

91 Tumor grading, number of positive lymph nodes, a context of in

92 tly correlated with histopathologic activity grading of ACR (P < 0.01).

93 atients with Canadian Cardiovascular Society grading of angina pectoris class 1 (n=1107, 18 events).

94 atients with Canadian Cardiovascular Society grading of angina pectoris class 2 or higher (n=839, 34

95 ificant LTPAxCanadian Cardiovascular Society grading of angina pectoris class interaction was observe

96 infarction, Canadian Cardiovascular Society grading of angina pectoris class, and exercise capacity

97 Grading of baseline lesion opacity may be used in future

98 ision-threatening late AMD as well as manual grading of CFP.

99 dy analyzed data to assess the incidence and grading of complications and evaluate outcomes associate

100 Exact grading of diastolic function might improve risk stratif

101 Quantitative MRI enables the diagnosis and grading of fatty pancreas through simple chemical shift

102 AMD was diagnosed by grading of fundus photographs.

103 Grading of hepatitis activity (A) and staging of fibrosi

104 The Physicians grading of images from a digital hand-held non-mydriatic

105 P < 0.001), (3) fewer injections until first grading of lesion inactivity (<=3 vs. >3 injections: OR,

106 The sparsity of established tools for the grading of limbal stem cell deficiency hinder objective

107 that laser-extracted lipids allow immediate grading of medulloblastoma tumors into prognostically im

108 yte injury and assist in unambiguous staging/grading of NASH.

109 Accurate grading of non-muscle-invasive urothelial cell carcinoma

110 whose results were compared to the clinical grading of NPDR, the gold standard.

111 The percentage of correct grading of NV using SS-OCTA and FA was assessed for each

112 e Rotterdam criteria and (2) ophthalmologist grading of optic disc photographs for characteristic fea

113 lue during the clinical characterisation and grading of pathological conditions, such as pancreatitis

114 Accurate grading of patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs)

115 o December, 2018, are presented along with a Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Ev

116 review was completed in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

117 outcomes were evaluated by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

118 The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

119 following clinical outcomes using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

120 advanced 41 recommendations using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

121 iew of the literature was completed, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

122 nd rated recommendations by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

123 and 42 key recommendations using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

124 ritical care guideline recommendations using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

125 ow recommendations (4/47; 8.5%) were outside Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

126 The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

127 Strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

128 ecommendations in accordance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

129 re made, avoid such pairings when outside of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

130 cts of interest were followed and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

131 The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

132 The widely used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

133 review was developed in accordance with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

134 s recommendations, a category discouraged by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

135 public perspective; full adoption of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

136 independent literature reviews and using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

137 to the key questions according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

138 We evaluated the quality of evidence using grading of recommendations assessment, development and e

139 d the certainty of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

140 f evidence was evaluated by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

141 ommendations were graded by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

142 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and E

143 of evidence was rated as moderate using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

144 interval = 4.36-11.64; 5 studies; I(2) = 0%; Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

145 ulated, written, and graded using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

146 t approach for network meta-analysis and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

147 ed recommendations were formulated using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and

148 e was assessed at an outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

149 The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

150 his technical review was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

151 y the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

152 Recommendations were developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

153 g a summary of the findings according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

154 or intervention effects was summarized using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

155 nt of the certainty in the evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

156 The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

157 ssed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

158 d assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

159 rval = 3.21-18.61; 10 studies; I(2) = 20.3%; Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

160 interval = 2.45-3.59; 4 studies; I(2) = 0%; Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

161 The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

162 e assessed the risk of bias with Cochrane or Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

163 a scores (NOS) and quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and

164 ecommendations, of which the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment,Development and Ev

165 Evidence certainty was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and

166 ssed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and

167 We assessed certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and

168 The Expert Panel used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and

169 erformed 15 systematic reviews, applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

170 stitial lung disease and HP using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

171 The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

172 The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

173 The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

174 certainty of evidence was explored using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

175 ed the certainty of evidence on the basis of Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

176 e studies (up to July 2018) and followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

177 ertainty of the evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

178 reviews of the relevant research and applied Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

179 Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and

180 Meta-analyses were conducted with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

181 of the relevant literature, and applied the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

182 for conflicts of interest, according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

183 random-effects models and classified by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

184 The Cochrane risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

185 nd recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

186 Using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and

187 Grading of severe (aortic valve area <=1 cm(2)) aortic s

188 The machine-grading of slopes involved during ski run construction c

189 0.89) and 86% (kappa = 0.78) in the ex vivo grading of steatosis and fibrosis, respectively.

190 erall accuracy of 87% (kappa = 0.81) for the grading of steatosis.

191 hange in VA from baseline, (3) time to first grading of the choroidal neovascular lesion as inactive,

192 The exact grading of the CrAgSQ results has some subjectivity, wit

193 Gold standard labels from reading center grading of the FAF images were transferred to the corres

194 on to improve the diagnostic accuracy in the grading of the tissue around the furcal lesion, thus pot

195 e used for the fully automated detection and grading of urothelial cell carcinoma.

196 agreement and kappa statistics for duplicate gradings of baseline color non- simultaneous stereoscopi

197 may potentially eliminate the need for human gradings of disc photographs.

198 to explore biomarkers for classification and grading on gliomas.

199 CTCAE-free survival was not related to Koos grading (p = 0.093).

200 With disc image grading, participants who performed moderate amounts of

201 An AI system with expert-level grading performance might contribute a second opinion, a

202 We also evaluated grading performance on 87 biopsies individually graded b

203 king was inferior to VA prediction by foveal grading (PL: r = 0.42, F = 3.12, P < 0.03).

204 DeepSeeNet simulates the human grading process by first detecting individual AMD risk f

205 By simulating the human grading process, DeepSeeNet demonstrated high accuracy w

206 based on several parameters (ie, tumor size, grading, proliferative index, localization, mesoappendic

207 ng was the strongest predictor of future VA (grading: r = 0.80, F = 67.49, P < 0.0001) compared with

208 develop a multitask deep learning model for grading radiographic hip osteoarthritis features on radi

209 Simulated pedicle screw grading resulted in a clinical accuracy of 100%.

210 and noninferior in others to clinical human grading (retinal specialists) and to the gold standard o

211 l bias in the included studies, and the NESR grading rubric was used to grade evidence supporting the

212 e graded the body of evidence using the NESR grading rubric.

213 as responders or nonresponders based on the grading scale by Salzer-Kuntschik.

214 ; by using the fellow eye as a control, this grading scale can be used to monitor the effect of CLN2

215 ssification provides additional steps in the grading scale for some characteristics, separates other

216 mild to advanced POAG (according to Glaucoma Grading Scale HODAPP) 2) cataract condition 3) treatment

217 Our analysis includes a grading scale to score the degree of evidence available

218 The studies had to provide a DR grading scale, a human grader as a reference standard, a

219 morphology using the Indiana Bleb Appearance Grading Scale, and complication rates.

220 phy and fatty infiltration using categorical grading scales (grade 0 indicates no tendon degeneration

221 gy Criteria for Adverse Events and the Balis grading scales showed lower sensitivity and specificity

222 variants of the Total Neuropathy Score, two grading scales, two semi-objective tests, one patient-re

223 regurgitation was graded using a five-class grading scheme (mild, moderate, severe, massive, and tor

224 nuclear medicine specialists using a 5-point grading scheme.

225 gns of ischemia according to a predetermined grading scheme.

226 tandard American Society of Echocardiography grading scheme.

227 was assessed by Swanepoel criteria, severity grading score (SGS), and the severity scoring index (SSI

228 VASOGRADE can be an effective grading score in patients with clipping or coiling for p

229 titution to investigate the effectiveness of grading scores between two groups.

230 In the coiling group (n = 320), none of the grading scores demonstrated favorable predictive accurac

231 Two separate grading sets consisting of scrambled, anonymized SS-OCTA

232 OCT and OCTA grading showed increasing central macular thickness and

233 The automated grading shows moderate agreement (kappa = 0.48 +/- 0.14

234 rmed using the custom-designed and validated grading software 3D OCTOR.

235 Current grading standards use a four-class system based on analy

236 f age-related maculopathy were determined by grading stereoscopic color fundus photographs using the

237 The standard actions applied (machine-grading, storage and re-use of topsoil, hydroseeding of

238 eater using the ANN compared to the standard grading system (0.87 vs. 0.79 and 83% vs. 80% respective

239 modeled after the Fistula Accordion Severity Grading System (B1: prolonged drainage only; B2: pharmac

240 Clinical features plus the MRI-based EPE grading system (prostate-specific antigen, International

241 s according to the World Health Organization grading system adopted in 2004.

242 assessed by multimodal imaging and a 3-stage grading system based on spectral-domain (SD) OCT.

243 ms, while we recently proposed a new, simple grading system based on the area of residual tumor (ART)

244 against logistic regression and the standard grading system by analysing their Receiver Operator Char

245 Based on the devised grading system described in this paper, the complication

246 veal tomograms were graded using our 6-point grading system for foveal hypoplasia and were segmented

247 PE) of prostate cancer and to propose an MRI grading system for pathologic EPE.

248 ease based on a multidimensional staging and grading system has been recently proposed.

249 s assessed using a standardized quantitative grading system of corneal epitheliopathy (ocular stainin

250 The present study revealed that the ART grading system that was designed to be simple and more o

251 An ILA grading system using imaging correlates with extraction

252 The ART grading system was a 5-tiered system based on a number o

253 An MRI-based EPE grading system was defined as follows: curvilinear conta

254 The new grading system was tested in two mouse OA models, (1) se

255 prostate cancer architecture is the Gleason grading system which divides the morphology of cancer in

256 d prognostic performance of the modified ART grading system with those of the four grading systems us

257 ned using the American College of Physicians grading system, and management recommendations were disc

258 using the Wisconsin Age-related Maculopathy Grading System, and severity was defined using a 5-step

259 This comprehensive grading system, based on the Banff Classification for sk

260 oups did not directly correlate with the WHO grading system, which classifies more than half of the t

261 A double grading system, with adjudication of disagreements of tw

262 The ACDiT grading system-graded from 0 to 5b-is applied in this ma

263 loupe and graded based on the WHO simplified grading system.

264 the need to develop an anaphylaxis severity grading system.

265 ed at development of an anaphylaxis severity grading system.

266 based on a clinically relevant histological grading system.

267 any visit, following the Wisconsin Cataract Grading System.

268 were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo grading system.

269 evelop a simple, objective, and reproducible grading system.

270 using the Wisconsin Age-Related Maculopathy Grading System.

271 ge of American Pathologists (CAP) and Evans' grading system.

272 e-free survival (p = 0.005), while the other grading systems did not show significant association wit

273 ed ART grading system with those of the four grading systems using a multicenter cohort.

274 ppa value) for Evans', CAP, MDA, JPS and ART grading systems were 0.34, 0.50, 0.65, 0.33, and 0.60, r

275 dance with the CAP, Evans', JPS, MDA and ART grading systems, and interobserver concordance was compa

276 erformance of commonly used tumor regression grading systems, namely College of American Pathologists

277 Pancreas Society (JPS) have introduced other grading systems, while we recently proposed a new, simpl

278 did binary outcome models by using standard grading systems.

279 eity in AD pathogenesis can therefore enable grading the biomedical relevance for specific pathways w

280 important role in supporting the diagnosis, grading the severity of disease, guiding treatment, dete

281 The DSRS appears to be a valid tool for grading the severity of swallowing impairment in patient

282 From fundus photography grading, the cause of poor vision appeared to be macular

283 Over the course of the experiment, grading time decreased across all conditions, although m

284 They also may increase grading time, although these effects may be ameliorated

285 orted confidence (5-point Likert scale), and grading time.

286 es and disadvantages of new and existing age-grading tools in an operational context.

287 atistically significant asymmetry in correct grading using SS-OCTA and FA.

288 obal indices were compared between the human gradings vs the M2M DL-predicted RNFL thickness values.

289 Overall, the mean percentage of correct NV grading was 87.8% using SS-OCTA with B-scans and 86.2% u

290 edominant; or mixed phenotypes, and severity grading was assigned as mild, moderate, or severe.

291 Visual acuity predicted by foveal grading was compared with prediction by PL, the current

292 The automated grading was compared with the consensus and individual g

293 nd perineural invasion, while CAP regression grading was not associated with any clinicopathological

294 ected dose (%ID) were calculated, and visual grading was performed.

295 Structural grading was the strongest predictor of future VA (gradin

296 UA collapse characteristics by DISE and FTP grading were compared between groups.

297 ative predictive value (NPV) from 2 separate gradings were calculated and compared.

298 els of DR was assessed comparing physician's grading with a retinologist's clinical examination by my

299 linical standard for these studies is visual grading (with grades of 0, 1, 2, and 3 indicating myocar

300 tification of NENs and compare it with tumor grading (World Health Organization 2010 classification).