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 (１語後でソート)

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 or approximately 3700 of those, and assessed intersubject (4 donors) as well as intrasubject (3 diffe
2                                              Intersubject agreement for lipids identified as rhythmic
3 functional regions in individuals to improve intersubject alignment of fMRI data.
4                                              Intersubject analgesia scores correlated to activity wit
5    We developed a new magnetoencephalography intersubject analysis approach to study the cortical syn
6                                              Intersubject analysis identified a correlate of head mot
7 variability was assessed by using intra- and intersubject analysis of variance and Bland-Altman analy
8                                 To determine intersubject and intereye variability, 98 eyes of 49 hea
9                         We found significant intersubject and interspecies gaze correlations, suggest
10           We tested this approach, examining intersubject and intrasubject variability and the validi
11    To identify sources of error, we compared intersubject and retest variability of brain uptake, art
12 p differences and performed well in terms of intersubject and test-retest variability.
13                            We determined the intersubject association between the rhythmic entrainmen
14                                              Intersubject averaging of structural magnetic resonance
15 n the present study, the authors used linear intersubject averaging of structural MR images to evalua
16  powerful intrasubject design, as well as an intersubject case-case design, to generate a list of dif
17                                              Intersubject CC in different AAL-derived regions was sim
18 l metrics; however, DeltaRnet showed a lower intersubject coefficient of variation (64%) than all of
19                                          The intersubject coefficients of variation after PBMC (43%)
20  When comparing different subjects, a higher intersubject consistency was found for stimulus-evoked a
21 rity matrix of all images close to the human intersubject consistency.
22                                              Intersubject correlation (ISC) of neural time courses wa
23                           Furthermore, using intersubject correlation analysis, we revealed increased
24                             Here, we used an intersubject correlation approach in fMRI to test the hy
25                            Here we show that intersubject correlation of eye movements during video p
26 e greater neural uniformity, as indicated by intersubject correlation.
27            We analyzed the encoding data for intersubject correlations (ISC) based on subjects' subse
28  multisubject voxelwise similarity measures [intersubject correlations (ISCs)] of functional MRI data
29                            We found enhanced intersubject correlations among viewers with high-risk p
30                                  Whole-brain intersubject correlations between the neural timeseries
31                                              Intersubject correlations in the pattern of evoked brain
32                                       We use intersubject cross-correlation analysis to capture netwo
33 metabolite ratios in longitudinal intra- and intersubject cross-sectional studies.
34 ossibility with an analysis of intra- versus intersubject differences in connectivity comparing high-
35 ell-to-cell variability to the prediction of intersubject differences in response to pharmacological
36                                              Intersubject differences in the facilitation-inhibition
37                                 In contrast, intersubject differences that emerge within groups are d
38                                        Large intersubject differences were found in both listener gro
39 e or remove the effects of retinal location, intersubject differences, and abnormally small K1 amplit
40 tortions previously reported reflect genuine intersubject differences.
41  18 seroconverters from Baltimore had a mean intersubject distance of 13.2%.
42                                Additionally, intersubject functional connectivity among these brain r
43     The CH method supports intermodality and intersubject global spatial normalization of tomographic
44 ed translation is driven by a combination of intersubject heterogeneity and the relatively low reliab
45 aim is to minimize variability in intra- and intersubject, intra- and interplatform, interexamination
46 f the brain is characterized by considerable intersubject morphological variability.
47 s.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The neural bases of intersubject motor coordination were studied by recordin
48  (fMRI) studies have traditionally relied on intersubject normalization based on global brain morphol
49 ls also showed strong, significant ROI-based intersubject Pearson correlations with R1,DED/R1,PiB and
50                                              Intersubject pharmacokinetic variability for zidovudine
51                                Instantaneous intersubject phase synchronization (ISPS) was computed t
52  (MEG) source imaging and a novel seed-based intersubject phase-locking approach to investigate the e
53 n percentage of histologic fibrosis was 18% (intersubject range, 5%-40%).
54                                           An intersubject representational similarity analysis of cro
55                                        Using intersubject representational similarity analysis, we fo
56  combination of brain-to-brain synchrony and intersubject representational similarity analysis, which
57                                              Intersubject reproducibility was examined by repeated-me
58            All intrasubject and three of six intersubject section prescription variances were signifi
59 ility of imaging orientations for intra- and intersubject series in clinical practice.
60     In the striatum and amygdala, increasing intersubject similarity in neural representations of pol
61 half and test-retest reliabilities, both the intersubject stability and score agreement were high for
62                                          The intersubject standard deviation of the thickness measure
63 imulus type is novel, as is the finding that intersubject synchrony in ventral striatum predicts rate
64 parietal and inferior temporal nodes, showed intersubject synchrony when viewing mathematics course r
65                  The moral principle guiding intersubject trade-off decision making observed in our s
66 ion in maximum concentration (Cmax), and the intersubject variabilities (coefficient of variation [CV
67                                        Large intersubject variabilities in acoustic injury are known
68  (11)C-MePPEP had relatively poor retest and intersubject variabilities, which were likely caused by
69 e samples obtained from healthy individuals (intersubject variabilities: 30-89%; n = 9), which sugges
70 y, V(T) had a good retest variability (14%), intersubject variability (26%), and intraclass correlati
71  retest variability by up to 75% and reduced intersubject variability (coefficient of variation) by a
72 mpared with controls, and showed significant intersubject variability (decreases in vermis ranged fro
73 after multiple oral administrations, and the intersubject variability after oral and 2-hour intraveno
74 al biomarkers may help clinicians understand intersubject variability and better predict the success
75                    We discovered significant intersubject variability and differences between stool a
76 0.3 to 0.8, showed the best intrasubject and intersubject variability and reliability.
77                                   The normal intersubject variability and the dynamic ranges of the m
78 n be used as a biomarker, data on intra- and intersubject variability and validity are needed.
79 vity analyses, our results revealed that the intersubject variability at birth features lower variabi
80 nfancy is a period featuring a high level of intersubject variability but the brain basis for such va
81     Differential measures may help to reduce intersubject variability due to unrelated factors.
82 s a unique means to probe the brain basis of intersubject variability during infancy.
83 odology to unravel the ionic determinants of intersubject variability exhibited in experimental recor
84                               The intra- and intersubject variability for PET expressed as the coeffi
85                                              Intersubject variability in behavioral adaptation rate c
86 Psychophysical measures are also affected by intersubject variability in central processing.
87                                              Intersubject variability in Cmax and AUC(0-t) was small
88                             In addition, the intersubject variability in cochlear expression of the a
89                                              Intersubject variability in connectivity was significant
90 ment resting-state functional MRI to explore intersubject variability in connectivity.
91 lateralization play a role in explaining the intersubject variability in contrast perception.
92 tribution, inter-hemispheric asymmetries and intersubject variability in cortical curvature, sulcal d
93                        There is considerable intersubject variability in early neurological course af
94 ative messenger RNA analysis revealed marked intersubject variability in expression of OATPs and NTCP
95                             The considerable intersubject variability in F(upLim) suggests that fixed
96            We found that previously reported intersubject variability in functional connectivity maps
97 pondence between subjects due to substantial intersubject variability in functional organization.
98                                       A wide intersubject variability in in vitro SN-38 glucuronide f
99  in aged monkeys was characterized by marked intersubject variability in labeling intensity, with dra
100 separate locomotor control networks and that intersubject variability in learning and in the generati
101 ecies should translate into lower intra- and intersubject variability in man.
102 ot mean square error 6.8%), and considerable intersubject variability in parameters of insulin cleara
103                               There is large intersubject variability in peak optical density, spatia
104 se equivocal results may be due to the large intersubject variability in response or the nonspecifici
105 and polymorphisms may be key determinants of intersubject variability in response to statin therapy i
106 These functional regions demonstrated marked intersubject variability in size, position, and connecti
107 ed at the individual subject level, but that intersubject variability in the location and size of the
108 , sharply contrasted by a striking degree of intersubject variability in the shape, extent, and relat
109     The temporal and spatial patterns of the intersubject variability of and genetic contributions to
110  temporal developmental patterns of both the intersubject variability of and genetic effects on the b
111                                              Intersubject variability of brain activation patterns wa
112 ogical proof of principle to investigate the intersubject variability of digit somatotopy across part
113                             The considerable intersubject variability of F(upLim) suggests that fixed
114                                          The intersubject variability of foveal cone density was meas
115                                          The intersubject variability of individual OS microbiomes wa
116 tudy was to prospectively compare intra- and intersubject variability of manual versus automatic magn
117 re basal plasma insulin profile; and a lower intersubject variability of response than the intermedia
118  were identified, as were differences in the intersubject variability of some metabolite levels.
119 tistical analysis revealed a large degree of intersubject variability of the gastric ecosystem.
120 f convergence stimuli (y = 0.10x + 1.62) and intersubject variability of VFA increased marginally wit
121                                 Overall, the intersubject variability patterns during infancy show bo
122 ject correlations (R = 0.71) and substantial intersubject variability provide strong support for the
123                                     Striking intersubject variability reflected at the level of lobes
124 lity of the method appeared acceptable, with intersubject variability the most significant factor aff
125 remains largely consistent, the magnitude of intersubject variability undergoes an interesting U-shap
126                                        While intersubject variability was high, the external mechanic
127 h improved repeatability (test-retest, 5.4%; intersubject variability, 5.2%).
128 d in terms of bias, test-retest variability, intersubject variability, and effect size.
129          Given its small size and anatomical intersubject variability, functional organization of the
130 he early detection of glaucoma is limited by intersubject variability, ganglion cell losses of 40% to
131 e D2 receptor levels, which show significant intersubject variability, predict reinforcing responses
132 hin this region, which displays considerable intersubject variability, remains unknown.
133                               Accounting for intersubject variability, the 55% of asthmatic patients
134 The changes in PaCO2 post-LVRS showed marked intersubject variability.
135  both human atrial structure, as well as its intersubject variability.
136 limit (F(upLim) ) of these responses and its intersubject variability.
137 -motor regions, distinct from the pattern of intersubject variability.
138 ate pregnancy, and there can be considerable intersubject variability.
139 ificant but bidirectional relationships with intersubject variability.
140 rability and efficacy several fold, yet with intersubject variability.
141               Both SUVr measures showed high intersubject variability.
142 nd in situ evolution are likely to introduce intersubject variability.
143 in the retinal microvasculature due to large intersubject variability.
144 nal group data and 0.60 after correction for intersubject variability.
145 r than cone density that have high levels of intersubject variability.
146  in AC activation can thus be ascribed to an intersubject variable (extraversion) when responding to
147               We examined the individual and intersubject variance of betaAR density and lymphocyte s
148  we demonstrate that dissociating intra- and intersubject variation can reveal genetic influence on a
149                       Here, by investigating intersubject variation in brain structure across a large
150 of conflict anticipation in association with intersubject variation in impulse control in 114 young a
151 d factors together accounted for only 18% of intersubject variation in pharmacokinetic parameters and
152 pharmacokinetic parameters and 32% to 64% of intersubject variation in PRI, MPA, and PRU.
153                                              Intersubject variation in the cerebellar distribution vo
154                                     However, intersubject variation in the defence of arterial oxygen
155                     However, there is a wide intersubject variation in the phosphene characteristics.
156 ray (Simoa) assays to measure both intra and intersubject variation of 15 cytokines.
157  SNPs could directly or indirectly influence intersubject variation of FVIII activity.
158 ntributed 2.2%, 3.5%, 4%, and 10.7% to FVIII intersubject variation, respectively.
159 n; in addition, there was fairly significant intersubject variation.
160 d 15 years (P<0.001), but explained <0.5% of intersubject variation.
161                                              Intersubject variations (n = 15; 2 subjects withdrew) in
162 ir metabolic space; the remaining intra- and intersubject variations appear to be influenced by varia
163                                         Wide intersubject variations between methods are partly attri
164 average efferent system strength can predict intersubject variations in acoustic injury.
165                                              Intersubject viral DNA distances increased from 2.3% in

 
Page Top