ライフサイエンスコーパス: high-risk group

1 78 (2.59-23.36, P = 0.0003) in the metabolic high risk group.

2 valve intervention improves outcomes in this high-risk group.

3 as split point, assigning 13 patients into a high-risk group.

4 after diagnosis to advance research in this high-risk group.

5 h sodium reduction and the DASH diet in this high-risk group.

6 interventions to reduce cancer risk in this high-risk group.

7 ve intervention for preventing falls in this high-risk group.

8 with no apparent bleeding liability in this high-risk group.

9 made up the low-risk group; all others, the high-risk group.

10 and new approaches are needed for this very-high-risk group.

11 a low CFH risk score improved more than the high-risk group.

12 aining 73040 women and 34608 men made up the high-risk group.

13 e of prevention and control measures in this high-risk group.

14 tients with low-grade dysplasia to a low- or high-risk group.

15 lternative interventional procedures in this high-risk group.

16 14.4 % in the low-risk group to 56.2% in the high-risk group.

17 t did not increase prescription rates in the high-risk group.

18 n in cortical surface area compared with the high-risk group.

19 hasis of existing weight guidelines for this high-risk group.

20 tatic tumors has not been documented in this high-risk group.

21 odel accuracy to 0.81 (9.5%, P<0.001) in the high-risk group.

22 pranolol is the least effective drug in this high-risk group.

23 so provide novel targets for therapy in this high-risk group.

24 activated NF-kappaB pathway association with high-risk group.

25 providing several potential benefits in this high-risk group.

26 educe stroke morbidity and mortality in this high-risk group.

27 f T2D in 12,535 Indians, a less explored but high-risk group.

28 verage by race/ethnicity within each age and high-risk group.

29 large nodules (>/=3 cm) were assigned to the high-risk group.

30 P = .008) and primarily confined to the non-high-risk group.

31 ied patients with molecular failure as a new high-risk group.

32 to the low-risk group, and the others to the high-risk group.

33 oup and 55 +/- 11 ng/mg of creatinine in the high-risk group.

34 e for life stress in psychiatric patients, a high-risk group.

35 rvention to preserve visual function in this high-risk group.

36 ectively, compared with 90%, 60%, and 47% in high-risk group.

37 decrease followed by a slow increase in the high-risk group.

38 7130-8658) person-years unrecognised in the high-risk group.

39 ta applicable to this frequently encountered high-risk group.

40 among Danish healthcare workers to identify high risk groups.

41 more units screening patients for MRSA from high risk groups.

42 statistically distinct low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups.

43 take of STI testing for all groups including high-risk groups.

44 specificity (87.1-100%) in both healthy and high-risk groups.

45 to target lung-cancer prevention measures to high-risk groups.

46 ntly distinguish ESCC patients into low- and high-risk groups.

47 r individual carcinomas between the low- and high-risk groups.

48 ified patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups.

49 fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is worthwhile in high-risk groups.

50 ationale for future preventive strategies in high-risk groups.

51 us across both time points was found in both high-risk groups.

52 topoietic cell transplant (HCT) for specific high-risk groups.

53 Universal HIV testing may be mandatory in high-risk groups.

54 tient and to form low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk groups.

55 eemerging epidemic of HDV infection in these high-risk groups.

56 rapy should be granted for patients in these high-risk groups.

57 ther statins have chemopreventive effects in high-risk groups.

58 tion of infectiousness, and the existence of high-risk groups.

59 ion, but there are no data about patients in high-risk groups.

60 and used to classify patients into low- and high-risk groups.

61 forecast the progression of periodontitis in high-risk groups.

62 stimated the risk of death at 1 year for the high-risk groups.

63 thus, absolute benefits were greatest in the high-risk groups.

64 general and targeted initiatives focused on high-risk groups.

65 ay be highly cost effective when targeted at high-risk groups.

66 differentiate G1 and G2 tumors into low- and high-risk groups.

67 edictors of future suicide attempts in these high-risk groups.

68 th transition to suicide attempt among these high-risk groups.

69 umab during the RSV season, similar to other high-risk groups.

70 eptable 1-year graft and patient survival in high-risk groups.

71 to influenza viruses in healthy cohorts and high-risk groups.

72 dults, although the uptake was suboptimal in high-risk groups.

73 he APOL1 low-risk group (hazard ratio in the high-risk group, 1.88; P<0.001).

74 , the intermediate-risk group (41%), and the high-risk group (12%) showed 2-year rates of CNS disease

75 validation cohort, m7-FLIPI again defined a high-risk group (22%, 24/107) with 5-year failure-free s

76 In the training cohort, m7-FLIPI defined a high-risk group (28%, 43/151) with 5-year failure-free s

77 In the high-risk group, 3 of 21 eyes that underwent LPI (14.3%)

78 There was increased mortality in the high-risk group (5.5% compared with 2.5%) due to unnatur

79 In the high-risk group, 75% of patients were accurately predict

80 ight high-grade dysplasia cases, whereas the high-risk group (8% of the cohort) had no non-dysplastic

81 atify patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, according to the National Comprehensiv

82 V infection is significant, especially among high-risk groups (adjusted odds ratio, 2.0-3.6), when ta

83 derate-risk group with minimal change in the high-risk group after the American Heart Association gui

84 ctin-3 with new-onset HF was stronger in the high-risk group (all P<0.05).

85 strategies and the management of cases, and high risk groups and regions should be targeted.

86 ammes should recognise men as an underserved high-risk group and improve men's access to diagnostic a

87 curred in 58.1% of the patients in the APOL1 high-risk group and in 36.6% of those in the APOL1 low-r

88 For the high-risk group and its subcategories, the ICER was very

89 CV was 11.87% (95% CI 7.05-16.70) across all high-risk groups and 9.95% (6.79-13.11) in patients with

90 and HIV-infected individuals have emerged as high-risk groups and a reservoir for HDV infection.

91 Interventions should target these high-risk groups and be of sufficient quality to make th

92 Our results suggest mixing between high-risk groups and heterosexual populations and could

93 Cutoff values define low- and high-risk groups and improve risk prediction of GRACE sc

94 s not declining; more careful prescribing to high-risk groups and improved monitoring of serum levels

95 uberculosis transmission must be targeted to high-risk groups and settings.

96 a mathematical model of HIV transmission in high-risk groups and the general population using data f

97 isks of developing disease (if they are in a high-risk group) and avoid unnecessary screening and int

98 hter's transformation occurred in 17% of the high-risk group, and in no patient in the low-risk group

99 otoxic treatments should be reconsidered for high-risk groups, and frequent follow-up for high-risk s

100 ts might be used for average-risk as well as high-risk groups, and to prevent CRC recurrence after th

101 In the moderate- and high-risk groups, annual costs for 2012 and 2013 were hi

102 OR [AOR] 1.2; 95% CI, .4-3.3) but not in the high-risk group (AOR .4; 95% CI, .3-.5).

103 Screening high-risk groups appears effective, although general pop

104 management of pregnancy and delivery in this high-risk group are lacking.

105 nd why certain individuals within recognized high-risk groups are at greater risks than others for co

106 Prevention strategies targeted at high-risk groups are promising.

107 ts were assigned to mild-, intermediate-, or high-risk groups based on cutoff values for 2 of the fol

108 ntial heterogeneity, interventions targeting high-risk groups based on location, social determinants,

109 (SAMS) to classify patients into low-risk or high-risk groups based on the 52-gene signature.

110 er of person-years spent unrecognised in the high-risk group by 62% (95% CI 57-66; 4894 person-years)

111 % (95% CI 37.8%-55.2%) mortality risk in the high-risk group compared to 12.5% (95% CI 5.7%-25.4%) in

112 ta show significantly lower survival in this high-risk group compared to patients transplanted withou

113 n of newly diagnosed patients with MM in the high-risk group compared with current classifications.

114 l was only significantly associated with the high-risk group compared with the low-risk group.

115 peaked earlier (during teenage years) among high-risk groups compared with general populations.

116 both were higher in Status 1A and MELD >=40 high-risk groups compared with low-risk groups in the de

117 y outcome was increased in intermediate- and high-risk groups compared with low-risk groups, with HRs

118 transplantation in the intermediate-risk and high-risk groups compared with the low-risk group were 4

119 -related events in the intermediate-risk and high-risk groups, compared with the low-risk group, were

120 statistically distinct low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups, corresponding to cumulative incidences

121 If such a high risk group could be identified, they may benefit fr

122 Targeting of this high-risk group could reduce the financial, medical and

123 astasis developed in 0% (0/15) of those with high-risk group D retinoblastoma and 10% (10/102) of tho

124 consistent between sexes and after excluding high-risk groups (defined by age and occurrence of previ

125 ; 95% CI, 0.492-1.240), and in the "expanded high-risk" group, defined as those with high-risk cytoge

126 s the efficacy of therapy, CAC evaluation of high-risk groups (diabetes and other disease states char

127 ngoing PMTCT efforts, and the vaccination of high-risk groups, diagnosing and treating HBV infection

128 Within the high-risk group, differences in surface area at baseline

129 Pregnant women are a high-risk group during influenza pandemics.

130 etinoblastoma and 10% (10/102) of those with high-risk group E retinoblastoma over a mean follow-up p

131 cumulative incidence of advanced AMD for the high-risk groups, especially in ALIENOR.

132 investigation, including screening targeted high-risk groups, evaluation of the duodenoscope, and ge

133 NSCLC patients identified as high-risk groups exhibited >5 CTCs/15 mL in PPB and >50

134 though people who self-harm are an important high-risk group, focusing suicide prevention efforts on

135 We studied psychiatric patients, a high risk group for co-morbid pain disorders and increas

136 orn LGA may be identified early in life as a high-risk group for asthma.

137 Obese individuals are considered a high-risk group for developing severe influenza virus in

138 n whether kidney transplant recipients are a high-risk group for fracture.

139 Injecting drug users are a high-risk group for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection an

140 patients in the discovery set into a low- or high-risk group for PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.43; P = .0

141 n in Vellore than in Mexico City belong to a high-risk group for rotavirus infection and RVGE, and de

142 Children <3-months old were a high-risk group for severe pneumonia, independently of R

143 NCCN-IPI or IPI might better characterize a high-risk group for which novel treatment approaches are

144 , HIV-1 infected individuals may represent a high-risk group for XMRV infection and spread.

145 implemented as a pretesting tool to identify high-risk groups for broad monitoring of HPV-associated

146 mmend prioritizing seniors (65+ years) after high-risk groups for influenza vaccination during times

147 n (0-19 years) and seniors (65+ years) after high-risk groups for influenza vaccination during times

148 tion tree analysis was performed to identify high-risk groups for LN positivity.

149 This SNP may identify high-risk groups for lung damage in TB.

150 ly useful and may also assist in identifying high-risk groups for melanoma prevention strategies.

151 siderable, providing opportunities to target high-risk groups for prevention and treatment.

152 more marked in patients in the moderate- and high-risk groups for stroke according to the CHADS(2) ri

153 hat heighten risk, and that we better define high-risk groups for targeted preventive and interventio

154 longer duration of antibiotics, appear to be high-risk groups for unplanned, all-cause 30-day readmis

155 Stratification into a low (0/1 point) and high-risk group (>/=2 points) resulted in significantly

156 Compared with low-risk score group, high-risk group had 7-fold increased risk of 1-year mort

157 atelet ratio index and FIB-4 score, only the high-risk group had a greater risk of death or liver tra

158 the CRIC study, black patients in the APOL1 high-risk group had a more rapid decline in the eGFR and

159 Further, the high-risk group had a mortality rate 60 times higher tha

160 the low-risk group, those in the medium- and high-risk group had a significantly increased risk of re

161 Importantly, patients in the high-risk group had a significantly reduced overall surv

162 Patients in the high-risk group had the greatest benefit of ribavirin-ba

163 Several high-risk groups had more favorable ICERs, including pat

164 The high-risk groups had more than a 2-fold increased risk o

165 In contrast, those in the high-risk group have a > 10% risk of CNS relapse and sho

166 rmediate group, and 22.2% (15.3-31.5) in the high-risk group having distant recurrence.

167 targeted secondary anal cancer prevention in high-risk groups, HIV-negative women with cervical HPV16

168 [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.80-0.88; P < .001) and high-risk groups (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.78-0.85; P < .001)

169 ctions suggests that targeting prevention to high-risk groups (HRG) could be very effective.

170 Users of MHT may constitute an additional high-risk group in need of more frequent skin cancer scr

171 ncreas transplantation and clearly defines a high-risk group in need of specific intervention.

172 1.7% of the sample) represent a particularly high-risk group in whom the risk for renal scarring was

173 influenza vaccine performance across all WHO high-risk groups in Africa.

174 n to vulnerable, RSV-naive infants and other high risk groups, in which the burden of admission to ho

175 enters that conduct prospective screening in high-risk groups including families with clustering of P

176 uggest that novel vaccination strategies for high-risk groups, including the obese population, are re

177 e evaluated enhanced HIV testing (annual for high-risk groups), increased 3-month linkage to care (to

178 of the risk of asthma exacerbations in this high-risk group is attributable to a genetic risk factor

179 Screening in this high-risk group is warranted.

180 Long-term maintenance care for high-risk groups is essential to reduce the risk of peri

181 ommendations: Routine screening for NAFLD in high-risk groups is not advised because of uncertainties

182 vaccination for healthcare workers and other high-risk groups is the mainstay of the public health st

183 Patients in the metabolic high-risk group (low TSP and weight loss) had an increas

184 absence for a substantial time, and even in high-risk groups, many were not on sickness absence or d

185 Interventions targeting this high-risk group may decrease frequent hospital readmissi

186 d children, depression prevention methods in high-risk groups may need to take into consideration soc

187 Surveillance of high-risk groups, may facilitate detection of PDAC at an

188 erence to chlamydia and gonorrhea testing in high-risk groups merits improvement.

189 Patients in high-risk groups might be managed more aggressively and

190 ections for short-term CVCs, particularly in high-risk groups; more research is needed.

191 Further high-risk groups must be identified to develop an effect

192 Score, 5.9%) and 206 (12.2%) subjects in the high-risk group (n=1654; Framingham Risk Score, 18.6%).

193 ear kidney allograft survival rates of 6.0% (high-risk group, n=40), 44.9% (intermediate-risk group,

194 This review identified a possible high-risk group (nonresponse), which proved radioresista

195 radiomics model that identified a vulnerable high-risk group of early stage patients associated with

196 with a restrictive transfusion strategy in a high-risk group of elderly patients with underlying card

197 linical score, serosurveillance in a defined high-risk group of extracorporeal membrane oxygenator pa

198 sthma remains uncertain, particularly in the high-risk group of infants hospitalized for bronchioliti

199 ral nutrition safely and effectively to this high-risk group of infants.

200 Finally, in the ALSPAC high-risk group of male participants, those who used can

201 The high-risk group of patients had a shorter median TFS (22

202 urthermore, mutational analysis identified a high-risk group of patients with a shorter time to disea

203 The greatest effects were evident in the high-risk group of patients with all KIR ligands (relaps

204 ood response rates in this highly pretreated high-risk group of patients, there was no benefit in sur

205 The high-risk groups of both questionnaires were associated

206 early predictor of high-risk households and high-risk groups of contacts to help prioritize EBOV dis

207 risk prediction and therapeutic targets for high-risk groups of patients and offenders.

208 High-risk groups of patients with atrial fibrillation in

209 d on risk of death and return on investment, high-risk groups of the three age group subpopulations c

210 ed into clinical standard, intermediate, and high risk groups on the basis of a combination of Nation

211 ion (n = 17); and 3) subjects matched to the high-risk group on personal drug use but without a FH of

212 inical standard-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups on the basis of a combination of Nation

213 causes fulminant hepatic failure in specific high-risk groups only.

214 Vaccine-delivery strategies that target high-risk groups or settings might yield proportionally

215 2 copies of high-risk APOL1 variants (APOL1 high-risk group) or 0 or 1 copy (APOL1 low-risk group).

216 by subgroup for excess prematurity risk, the high-risk group (overall prematurity of 22.2% to 62.8%)

217 re < 5%, compared with approximately 20% for high-risk groups ( P < .001); cumulative incidence was o

218 strains of cannabis on risk, and to identify high-risk groups particularly susceptible to the effects

219 ork might help reduce HIV prevalence in this high-risk group, particularly in countries where the jud

220 Comparisons were made between high-risk group patients (PN) versus all others: 5-year

221 High-risk group patients and those that remain RT-PCR po

222 Among the CMV high-risk group, patients treated with belatacept presen

223 In this biologically high-risk group, pCR differs by receptor subset.

224 irmed ccRCC and fell into 1 of the following high-risk groups: pT3/pT4Nx/N0M0 or pTanyN+M0 or pT1b/pT

225 low-risk groups, with HRs at 10 years in the high-risk group ranging from 1.67 for the BARD score to

226 Data are scarce on bleeding rates in high-risk groups receiving combination therapy, such as

227 , limited uptake of therapy, particularly in high-risk groups, remains a substantial barrier to elimi

228 BWH T2b/T3 tumors define a high-risk group requiring further study for optimal mana

229 .2% (11.4-31.1) and 35.5% (23.6-47.4) in the high-risk group, respectively.

230 ntiles of the score were set as the low- and high-risk groups, respectively, and the other quintiles

231 and 100% and 97% in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups, respectively, with a median follow-up

232 %, and 87.5% in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively.

233 100%, 64%, and 24% for the low-, medium- and high-risk groups, respectively.

234 Risk was overestimated in the high-risk groups, resulting in a Hosmer-Lemeshow P value

235 the medium (risk score 0-4, 103 events) and high risk groups (risk score >/= 5, 505 events), respect

236 uction of mortality in the intermediate- and high-risk groups (risk ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.77-0.92 an

237 grams using an ECG and targeting 2 potential high-risk groups: school-aged children initiating stimul

238 .0), and 39.1% (95% CI: 19.7%, 61.5%) in the high-risk group (score > 8.0).

239 A cut-off at 2 points distinguished a high-risk group (score >2) from a low-risk group (score

240 sk categories, and the gaps between low- and high-risk groups seem to be narrowing.

241 ion of empiric antimicrobial therapy in this high-risk group should be restructured.

242 creening of pregnant and postpartum women in high-risk groups should be evaluated.

243 enocarcinoma dataset, in which the predicted high-risk group showed significantly worse survival than

244 en of disease now disproportionately affects high-risk groups such as migrants, homeless persons, and

245 tion with a high mortality rate that affects high-risk groups such as patients with neutropenia and h

246 e target for preventing colorectal cancer in high-risk groups such as those with familial adenomatosi

247 Programmes focused on high-risk groups, such as individuals leaving prisons, p

248 its associated complications, especially in high-risk groups, such as older obese men.

249 espite strong evidence to support its use in high-risk groups, such as people living with HIV and hou

250 treatment, and increasing testing frequency, high-risk-group testing, and adherence.

251 C]ABP688 BP(ND) values were only seen in the high risk group that used high quantities of cannabis.

252 nction in school age children may identify a high-risk group that could be targeted for intervention.

253 Individuals who travel may represent a high-risk group that could be targeted for malaria contr

254 s with moderate to severe asthma belong to a high-risk group that is susceptible to severe coronaviru

255 are classified into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups that reflect relative survival categori

256 istory of the disease to accurately identify high-risk groups that would be best served by screening.

257 As a practicing frontline surgeon in a high risk group, the hospital offered the author, and ot

258 In this high-risk group, the emergence of new viral strains foll

259 In this high-risk group, the study supports the concept of posto

260 In the Thymoglobulin high-risk group, the transcriptome profile was identical

261 Among high-risk groups, the agreement between QFT-Plus and QFT

262 , but for this benefit to be realized by all high-risk groups, there must be careful attention to ens

263 AIMS: To engage with high risk groups to identify knowledge and awareness of

264 for prospective and longitudinal studies in high-risk groups to clarify how changes in sleep physiol

265 ast cancer prevention, should be targeted to high-risk groups to maintain a favourable benefit-risk r

266 At multivariable Cox analysis, the high-risk group (TP53, RB1, and/or KDM6A mutations) was

267 factors), with 5-year survival of 44%, and a high-risk group (two to five factors), with 5-year survi

268 ere stratified into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups using the Framingham risk score.

269 Identification of high-risk groups using this index would distinguish pati

270 edictive value for cirrhosis was >66% in the high-risk group vs approximately 50% in the low-risk gro

271 risk group was 93.5% (89.0-98.3%) and in the high-risk group was 81.1% (71.5-92.1).

272 in-hospital mortality for low-, medium-, and high-risk groups was 8%, 7%, and 16%, respectively, for

273 del for OS separating patients into low- and high-risk groups was produced using penalized Cox regres

274 An immunization campaign targeting high-risk groups was undertaken with pneumococcal polysa

275 odel, individual patients categorized in the high risk group were associated with an increased risk o

276 ow-up (36 months of age), 22 children in the high-risk group were diagnosed with ASD.

277 e increased rates of major depression in the high-risk group were largely accounted for by the early

278 ariable logistic regression, patients in the high-risk group were more likely to require renal replac

279 e early onsets, but later recurrences in the high-risk group were significantly increased.

280 ar EFS rates in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 70%, 56%, and 29%, respectively.

281 year OS rates in MIPI low, intermediate, and high-risk groups were 83%, 63%, and 34%, respectively.

282 rences in 8-OHdG values between the low- and high-risk groups were analyzed for outliers to identify

283 Using this score, low-, medium-, and high-risk groups were defined, with predicted survival a

284 berculosis in the low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk groups were, respectively, 1.4% (95% CI 0.7-2.

285 berculosis in the low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk groups were, respectively, 2.8% (95% CI 1.7-4.

286 activation than RISK+ subjects) and the SCZ high-risk group, where the opposite genotype effect was

287 DGKH gene in healthy controls vs the bipolar high-risk group, which manifests as a failure to disenga

288 early recurrences of VT after ablation are a high risk group who may be identifiable from their clini

289 Smokers aged >/= 65-80 y are a high-risk group who may benefit from screening.

290 In the healthy controls and high-risk group who remained well, this region demonstra

291 Dual expresser status may help to identify a high-risk group who should undergo CNS-directed evaluati

292 S cohort includes a low risk group and three high-risk groups who at age 3 were developing (i) typica

293 is only likely to be cost-effective for very high-risk groups who may be exposed to multiple exposure

294 A high-risk group with a four-fold increase in suicide mor

295 nths (median survival was not reached) and a high-risk group with a median survival of 7.8 months (95

296 he cohort into three distinct risk groups: a high-risk group with a median time to progression (TTP)

297 The model identified a high-risk group with over 30 times the occurrence rate o

298 Community-based screening of high-risk groups with functional testing using FDT perim

299 re stratified the patients into low-risk and high-risk groups with significant survival difference.

300 ed mortality, morbidity, and expense in this high-risk group, with decreased longevity, present a gro