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 l confounding from unmeasured factors (e.g., sunlight exposure).
2 sformation, including photodegradation under sunlight exposure.
3  the first prodromal symptom associated with sunlight exposure.
4 cal composition of each DOM source following sunlight exposure.
5  were positively correlated to the increased sunlight exposure.
6 relate with underlying iris pigmentation and sunlight exposure.
7 with co-occurring ALHA was accelerated under sunlight exposure.
8  vitamin D supplementation, and insufficient sunlight exposure.
9 factors including organic macromolecules and sunlight exposure.
10  urinary tract symptoms, stress, and reduced sunlight exposure.
11 n of NER, unlike DSB, is shaped primarily by sunlight exposure.
12 ly addressed by adequate vitamin D intake or sunlight exposure.
13  protective measures of overall reduction of sunlight exposure.
14 lifestyles such as specific foods and modest sunlight exposure.
15 MS2) over time in clear water with simulated sunlight exposure.
16 implified, hypothetical spill after 1 day of sunlight exposure.
17                       After 5 h of simulated sunlight exposure (5100 J/m(2) UVB and 1.2 x 10(5) J/m(2
18 n the mtDNA ones; increasing temperature and sunlight exposure accelerated significantly the decay of
19 manifested clinically by hypersensitivity to sunlight exposure and an increased predisposition to ski
20 Is) for the associations between measures of sunlight exposure and BCC/SCC, stratified by genus-speci
21 vidence suggests a negative relation between sunlight exposure and breast cancer risk.
22 g transplantation; and, perhaps, by reducing sunlight exposure and by early excision of suspicious dy
23   After a moderate UV dose that approximates sunlight exposure and is lethal to fission yeast checkpo
24 y be directly under the influence of ambient sunlight exposure and may have important implications fo
25 tent of MMHg photodegradation due to limited sunlight exposure and penetration but also reveal large
26  in human skin correlated well with putative sunlight exposure and resembled that observed in ultravi
27                      Patients recorded daily sunlight exposure and symptom data in an electronic diar
28 he nuanced relationship between leaf height, sunlight exposure and the resulting variation in isotope
29 until approximately 30,000 hours of lifetime sunlight exposure and then plateaus.
30 Future studies could determine if additional sunlight exposure and vitamin D supplementation might re
31 ity to the beneficial and harmful effects of sunlight exposure and when determining optimal photother
32 viewed to determine smoking and alcohol use, sunlight exposure, and diet; underwent fundus photograph
33 steroid use, smoking status, alcohol status, sunlight exposure, and history of hypertension and diabe
34 nd severity decrease sharply with increasing sunlight exposure, and sunlight supports vitamin D(3) sy
35 d different factors (water pH, storage time, sunlight exposure, and temperature) that affect/control
36 harm and long-term health risks of excessive sunlight exposure are affecting the lives of nearly all
37 els of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and low sunlight exposure are known risk factors for the develop
38  unavoidable in living creatures, because of sunlight exposure as well as environmental chemicals pre
39  the peer-reviewed literature in relation to sunlight exposure assessment and the validity of using s
40  following general recommendations on summer sunlight exposure at northerly latitudes, and increased
41                                              Sunlight exposure can exacerbate local as well as system
42                                  2) Adequate sunlight exposure cannot be determined exactly for every
43                                              Sunlight exposure consistently increased production of d
44 ce and support the hypothesis that extensive sunlight exposure contributes to the induction of lympho
45 ulation from a lifetime of repeated low-dose sunlight exposure could cause premature skin ageing (pho
46                         Targeted guidance on sunlight exposure could usefully enhance vitamin D statu
47 rrelation of Lisch nodule burden to lifetime sunlight exposure "dose" or NF1 neurocutaneous severity.
48                                 Among these, sunlight exposure emerges as being the most likely candi
49 etiology is supported by ecologic studies of sunlight exposure, experimental mechanism studies, and s
50                        Increased duration of sunlight exposure had an uncertain association with atop
51 d in non-carbonated waters, we conclude that sunlight exposure has no effect.
52 Any potential positive effects conferred via sunlight exposure have to be carefully balanced against
53 tions, animal exposures, indoor environment, sunlight exposure, household size, household income and
54                     Here we show how and why sunlight exposure impacts microbial respiration of DOC d
55 of mtDNA damage as a biomarker of cumulative sunlight exposure in human skin is a relatively new fiel
56 and the severity of symptoms associated with sunlight exposure in patients with erythropoietic protop
57 antly increased the duration of symptom-free sunlight exposure in patients with erythropoietic protop
58 acetaldehyde and Sb migration increased with sunlight exposure in ultrapure water.
59 efficacy of a dose range of simulated summer sunlight exposures in raising vitamin D status in UK adu
60  the first prodromal symptom associated with sunlight exposure increased significantly with dersimela
61                        The DOC leached after sunlight exposure increasingly reflected the (13)C and (
62 his study demonstrates that, under simulated sunlight exposure, ionic Ag is photoreduced in river wat
63                                              Sunlight exposure is a control of long-term plastic fate
64                                              Sunlight exposure is a major risk factor for melanoma.
65                                              Sunlight exposure is strongly implicated in the etiology
66 l activity AOR 4.8 (2.8-8.1), and (iv) daily sunlight exposure < 60 min AOR 2.2 (1.3-3.7).
67 plemental intakes of vitamin D and long-term sunlight exposure may be the most logistically feasible
68  of seasonality suggests that reduced winter sunlight exposure may not be a strong contributor to tub
69              These studies suggest that UVR (sunlight exposure) may be an effective means of suppress
70        However, growth stimulation following sunlight exposure of DOM came at a cost.
71               Gene expression suggested that sunlight exposure of DOM initially stimulated microbial
72                             The influence of sunlight exposure of grape clusters on juice and wine co
73 OM provide a mechanistic explanation for how sunlight exposure of terrigenous DOM alters microbial pr
74                                The effect of sunlight exposure on chemical migration into PET-bottled
75                    The generalized effect of sunlight exposure on subsequent microbial activity, medi
76 lts, including vitamin D supplementation and sunlight exposures on weekdays and weekends, were compar
77 e to inadequate vitamin D supply either from sunlight exposure or diet is the main cause.
78 .0%, however not statistically influenced by sunlight exposure (p > 0.05).
79      Sunburn due to cutaneous sensitivity to sunlight exposure (P = .006) and poor tanning ability (P
80     Although there is growing agreement that sunlight exposure, particularly the ultraviolet waveleng
81  unpasteurized milk, antihelminth treatment, sunlight exposure, pet and farm animal exposure, cigaret
82                                         Only sunlight exposure photobleached membranes, reduced singl
83 zards, affecting agriculture through reduced sunlight exposure, photosynthesis, crop yields, and food
84                                              Sunlight exposure produces a variety of adverse cutaneou
85                                  In summary, sunlight exposure questionnaires currently provide impre
86 ported dietary and supplemental intakes, and sunlight exposure questionnaires or diaries.
87 xposure assessment and the validity of using sunlight exposure questionnaires to quantify vitamin D s
88 comparable to a quarter of the median summer sunlight exposure received locally.
89      This study supports the hypothesis that sunlight exposure reduces risk of advanced breast cancer
90 stic regression model identified duration to sunlight exposure (regression coefficient, beta = - 0.01
91 ion exposure (for example, through excessive sunlight exposure) remains the primary risk factor for m
92 aware about its aggravation with smoking and sunlight exposure, respectively.
93 dicate that GO phototransforms rapidly under sunlight exposure, resulting in chemically reduced and p
94 such as the diurnal cycles of light and day, sunlight exposure, seasons, and geographic characteristi
95 ; directly associated with time outdoors and sunlight exposure), serum vitamin D concentrations, and
96  in natural biofilm samples decreased during sunlight exposure similar to well-defined bacterial phos
97 3.5 degrees N) received a simulated summer's sunlight exposures, specifically 1.3 standard erythemal
98 on resonance mass spectrometry revealed that sunlight exposure substantially increased the number of
99 us sites, including those receiving sporadic sunlight exposure, suggesting that these cells may play
100      MS prevalence decreases with increasing sunlight exposure, supporting our hypothesis that the su
101 ll consumer PE bags produced more DOC during sunlight exposure than the pure PE (1.2- to 2.0-fold).
102   Much uncertainty remains about the type of sunlight exposure that most increases risk of cutaneous
103 resulting device, after 15 min of artificial sunlight exposure, the change in color of the patch was
104 tions were explained by vitamin D intake and sunlight exposure, the former being more important in wo
105      Recommendations on limitation of summer sunlight exposure to prevent skin cancer may conflict wi
106 ve, nonintrusive, and economical measures of sunlight exposure to quantify personal vitamin D status.
107 attained after a summer's short (13 minutes) sunlight exposures to 35% skin surface area; these findi
108                  Here we provide evidence UK sunlight exposure upregulates the cardio protectant nitr
109 g, oral intake of vitamin D and estimates of sunlight exposure), with and without consideration of ot
110 months, equivalent to 25-75 years of natural sunlight exposure without considering other confounding

 
Page Top