ライフサイエンスコーパス: terminology

1 d, in part due to confusing and inconsistent terminology.

2 were recommended over other device-specific terminology.

3 peline, and the addition of patient-friendly terminology.

4 or a reliable and automatic extension of the terminology.

5 and will ultimately define the value of this terminology.

6 ring the need for unity regarding the use of terminology.

7 osis and management of ITP and standards for terminology.

8 e term procoagulant platelet as the unifying terminology.

9 gs with a more complex model and alternative terminology.

10 diofrequency power deposition guidelines and terminology.

11 grouped under a heterogeneous and imprecise terminology.

12 oward a more stringent and consistent use of terminology.

13 ng lncRNA classifications, nomenclature, and terminology.

14 embled to define a consensus for OCT imaging terminology.

15 esearch and also suggestions for the cognate terminology.

16 inology for widefield imaging and associated terminology.

17 st should be described by using standardized terminology.

18 s and by projecting concepts between medical terminologies.

19 concepts underlying the standardized nursing terminologies.

20 for "next-generation," high-coverage lexical terminologies.

21 sing the ICD-10 and Global Burden of Disease terminologies.

22 ap-and-inject" procedure (Current Procedural Terminology 67015, 67025), a vitrectomy (67036), or an i

23 intravitreal injections (Current Procedural Terminology 67028) performed between 2003 and 2012.

24 bination of those three standardized nursing terminologies; 9.6% on Omaha System; 7.1% on Internation

25 vergent evolution (or 'homoplasy' in genetic terminology): a feature or a molecule that is present in

26 rmation is the lack of standards that define terminology, acceptable data and methods, and reporting

27 on options and cardiopulmonary resuscitation terminology among patients and surrogate decision makers

28 accine and drug relations and how biomedical terminologies and ontologies have been used to support t

29 and reuse of terms from existing taxonomies, terminologies and ontologies.

30 uous improvement of the standardized nursing terminologies and use in clinical practice.

31 s (inpatient setting) and Current Procedural Terminology and Ambulatory Payment Classification codes

32 identified from Medicare Current Procedural Terminology and Ambulatory Payment Classification reimbu

33 rdized malformations of cortical development terminology and classification for neuroradiological pat

34 as become beleaguered by pitfalls related to terminology and classification; procedural, assay, and s

35 health-related fields have incorporated the terminology and context of translational science, enviro

36 resuscitation and resuscitation options and terminology and could correctly name components of cardi

37 To develop consensus terminology and criteria for defining atrophy based on O

38 lic fatty liver diseases and inaccuracies in terminology and definitions necessitate a reappraisal of

39 self-management, we found that variations in terminology and descriptions of events, symptoms, and re

40 Modern revisions in the terminology and diagnostic criteria for IIH help guide c

41 and discussion of vaccine- and drug-related terminology and drug studies.

42 Addressing ambiguous terminology and feasibility is needed in establishing th

43 from surgery using Comprehensive Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Disease

44 Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases

45 ss familiarity of their patients with dental terminology and knowledge of periodontal disease to prov

46 Here, we propose a unifying terminology and operational definition of MLS.

47 ield, we now have a lexicon of epidemiologic terminology and particular methods that have developed a

48 e, we discuss the limitations of our current terminology and propose a new approach for defining memo

49 onfusion because of the lack of standardized terminology and reporting guidelines.

50 their special report: (a) standardization in terminology and reporting of spatial gradient magnetic f

51 yps have been hampered by inconsistencies in terminology and reporting, but the prevalence of serrate

52 nsensus that should guide the use of staging terminology and secure the classification of anatomical

53 The principles for the terminology and specific application were eventually com

54 More consistent and correct use of terminology and study design principles will improve cli

55 Difficulties with microbiota terminology and technologies, as well as differences amo

56 iterature does not always utilise consistent terminology and the misuse of some expressions in epidem

57 Data System (LI-RADS) to provide consistent terminology and to improve imaging interpretation.

58 However, the account is limited by loose terminology, and by its commitment to a view of the chil

59 iples is provided, including for hippocampal terminology, and development from an embryonic nonfolded

60 Heterogeneity of populations, terminology, and end points in the literature confound e

61 delocalization are described in graph theory terminology, and interconnections between local and glob

62 ciated with timing of burial, use of certain terminology, and methods of transporting the body.

63 assification of Diseases, Current Procedural Terminology, and National Drug Codes directory.

64 port format, focusing on relevant variables, terminology, and required minimal elements for clinical

65 ification and refinement of key concepts and terminology, and second by the incorporation of an addit

66 national Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry terminology, and, where appropriate, Chemical Abstracts

67 rature in recent decades, yet confusion over terminology, application and utility persists.

68 Multiple definitions and terminologies are currently in use for sepsis, septic sh

69 ation steps of natural resins and associated terminology are a subject of constant debate.

70 ical Trials in Chronic GVHD standardized the terminology around chronic GVHD classification systems t

71 misattribution of IRD to kidney quality, IRD terminology as a barrier to meaningful understanding, an

72 tically discussing the sometimes-conflicting terminology as well as renewable sources with a special

73 he expert panel identified a lack of uniform terminology being used in recent literature to describe

74 irect visit billing, CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) billing, and data from the National Ambulat

75 andardized continuous electroencephalography terminology blinded to clinical data.

76 finition of terms/codes, the availability of terminology browsers, a recommended list of codes and me

77 tages of NOBLE Coder include its interactive terminology builder tool, ease of configuration, and ada

78 er communication barriers and develop shared terminology, but also resulted in a visible sequence of

79 ariables were interpreted using standardized terminology by certified reviewers.

80 Few publications used the terminology 'childhood eczema', 'flexural eczema', 'infa

81 Here we developed new terminology, classification, and computer algorithms for

82 = 33,718) with a recorded Current Procedural Terminology code for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or

83 nted unique claims with a Current Procedural Terminology code of 65855 (LTP) submitted by ophthalmolo

84 ication of Diseases code, Current Procedural Terminology code, Hispanic ethnicity, and self-reported

85 undergoing procedures for Current Procedural Terminology codes 67141 (prophylaxis of retinal detachme

86 rocedures identified with Current Procedural Terminology codes 67141 and 67145.

87 s, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) Current Procedural Terminology codes and prescriptions for cyclosporine A o

88 d December 31, 2013, with Current Procedural Terminology codes for a subtotal colectomy or total abdo

89 ance was identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes for diagnostic VTE imaging.

90 nticipated arrival of new Current Procedural Terminology codes in the United States for small-bowel a

91 inclusion if one of their Current Procedural Terminology codes matched any of the operations identifi

92 by Medicare as tracked by Current Procedural Terminology codes on intravitreal injections (67028), re

93 n was standardized across Current Procedural Terminology codes using a z score.

94 year period, 146 distinct Current Procedural Terminology codes were among the top 100 procedures, and

95 nts were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes, and their medical records were review

96 th revision diagnosis and Current Procedural Terminology codes, medication lists, and positive-presen

97 -VEGF injections based on Current Procedural Terminology codes.

98 November 30, 2012, using Current Procedural Terminology codes.

99 eatment procedures as per Current Procedural Terminology codes; comorbidities as per International Cl

100 The definitions and terminologies commonly used to evaluate the performance

101 The terminology 'complexion' was recently proposed to distin

102 e identification of the standardized nursing terminology concepts applicable to a health setting from

103 ew the scientists who introduced the seminal terminology, concepts, methodological approaches, and in

104 Questions concerned terminology, content, and timing of decision-making step

105 After matching strategy for Common Procedure Terminology (CPT) and year, we compared the accuracy of

106 79.24, and 379.25), and a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code for vitrectomy surgery.

107 ed for all active level I Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes from 2011 CMS files.

108 ICD-9) procedure codes or Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes indicating an eye examination, a

109 d from the database using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes.

110 s, Ninth Revision (ICD-9)/Current Procedures Terminology (CPT) codes.

111 re identified by means of current procedural terminology (CPT), Healthcare Common Procedure Coding Sy

112 ith established patients (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code 99213) and a price index measurin

113 pletely defined and notoriously inconsistent terminology, creating a formidable challenge for data in

114 , and toxicity was recorded using the Common Terminology Criteria (CTCAE) v4.0.

115 Infectious complications were common (Common Terminology Criteria [CTC] grade 3/4: DD 16%, DVD 18%) a

116 y coded for leukoencephalopathy using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event version 4.

117 on of the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) via tabl

118 d 3 mo was evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version

119 e events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version

120 ffects were measured according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE).

121 e-related adverse events rated by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE; v4.03) c

122 ) using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (grade 1-5), and

123 ient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

124 c events were reviewed and graded per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (v4.03).

125 ure, distant metastasis, and selected Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3) >/=

126 systolic dysfunction on the basis of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 3) defi

127 ding to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0) an

128 al, and acute and late toxicities per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0).

129 uestionnaires and graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.03).

130 Toxicity was categorized by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.03).

131 mented prospectively and according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.0 criteria bas

132 on Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0] or Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 3]).

133 luation criteria were adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.3]) a

134 The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and the Balis gr

135 Any grade 3 or 4 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events cardiac, pulmona

136 all survival, safety as determined by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events criteria, and Qo

137 se, headache, and moderate dizziness (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 2).

138 ll risk for National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 ALT elev

139 Adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events greater than gra

140 events was recorded and graded using "Common Terminology Criteria for adverse events in Trials of Adu

141 y using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scale or an oxal

142 ient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scores (0 to 4 s

143 Adverse events were assessed with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v 3.0.

144 CSS had ALT > upper limit of normal (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.

145 Serum ALT level was graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.

146 nt with the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.

147 ted symptoms were collected using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0 at p

148 Adverse events were graded with Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0.

149 e events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTC

150 hair preservation assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 scal

151 ccording to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0), ph

152 Immune-related Response Criteria and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.

153 g the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0.

154 ding to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for adverse events version 4.0.

155 d vital signs graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0.

156 Adverse events were assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03, an

157 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events was used to cate

158 ient-reported outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events).

159 -grade adverse events, defined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, do not provide

160 m diagnosis were classified using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, grades 3 to 5 (

161 nd long-term toxicity was documented (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v 5.0) using a

162 cts were prospectively assigned using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, v3.0.

163 earing Association; Brock; Chang; and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3 [CTCA

164 ociation Ototoxicity Criteria (ASHA), Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0 (CT

165 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 3.0, wa

166 (primary aim 2, safety) and toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0) (p

167 (0.5%) grade 3 radiation dermatitis (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0).

168 grades were reported according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, an

169 symptoms were evaluated by using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0, fr

170 e events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0.

171 nts after treatment (according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03) i

172 te Cancer Working Group 2), toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03),

173 The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03, w

174 with the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03.

175 al examination and coded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 4.03.

176 ffects were recorded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0.

177 s, which were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

178 with the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

179 h conditions were classified with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

180 or 2, mild or moderate) according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

181 assessed and handled according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

182 orted using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

183 Adverse events were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

184 e maximum grade events defined by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

185 ccording to a modified version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

186 three grade 4 events according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

187 occurrence of serious adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria grades 4 or 5) did not differ betwe

188 verity to conditions using a modified Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4

189 graded for severity using a modified Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events.

190 re derived from published Current Procedural Terminology data.

191 singly useful for chemists to adopt the knot terminology employed by other disciplines.

192 earch has evolved over the past century, the terminology employed to categorize it has failed to evol

193 As numerous publications on IRE with varying terminology exist so far - with numbers continuously inc

194 Studies should use detailed and consistent terminology for breastfeeding definition, including freq

195 e provide a consensus on the optimal use and terminology for cancer staging that emerged from a consu

196 By a detailed documentation and common terminology for communicating outcomes, these tools hope

197 Our objective is to provide a guide to the terminology for different technologies in the field whic

198 Regarding a link to caries, standard terminology for exposures (e.g., nocturnal feeding) is r

199 ancer screening and care, such as use of new terminology for indolent and precancerous disorders.

200 epilepsy in addition to revised criteria and terminology for its diagnosis and classification.

201 logists reviewed these lesions using current terminology for serrated polyps.

202 ng, using universally accepted and agreed on terminology for solid pancreatic neoplasms, is needed.

203 Changing the terminology for some of the lesions currently referred t

204 ablation by outlining a standardized set of terminology for the IRE procedure with the NanoKnife Syt

205 al imaging was assembled to define consensus terminology for widefield imaging and associated termino

206 d negotiation was undertaken until unanimous terminology for widefield imaging was achieved.

207 (Of note, terminology from survey data cited for this article vari

208 Yet the same terminology has been repurposed by subsequent researcher

209 Terminology has changed and 'isolated dystonia' is used

210 ate, conflicting, confusing, and overlapping terminology has fostered ambiguity and lack of clarity i

211 unately, unclear or incorrect use of the new terminology has led to semantic misunderstandings that i

212 d in many ways, but general agreement on the terminology has not yet been reached.

213 The use of Bellonci's terminology has, through a series of misunderstandings a

214 en identified, and analogous with epigenetic terminology, have been designated "writers," "erasers,"

215 Conventional terminology, i.e. retinotopy, implies that the topograph

216 are extensively annotated within specialized terminologies, implying that synonymy is important for p

217 However, the standard terminology in such collections suffers from low usage i

218 ystone, Colorado, and featured a workshop on terminology in the cell plasticity field.

219 To clarify the often confusing terminology in this field, "band warping" is precisely d

220 ep stages and reconciling inconsistencies in terminology in this field.

221 nfigurable matching strategies, and multiple terminology input formats.

222 =58), implementation of standardized nursing terminologies into electronic health records (n=12), and

223 s anticipated, the classification system and terminology introduced here will allow new compounds to

224 s concise clinical review proposes that this terminology is not evidence based and that prescribing p

225 ondition, and the present review updates the terminology issues, common causes, and potential future

226 Despite similar terminology, it remains unclear whether the subjective f

227 d according to the Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology (LAST) in low-grade (LSIL) and high-grade sq

228 The introduction of a gene-based, unifying terminology led to the identification of an increasing n

229 It is based on the RxNorm drug terminology maintained by the U.S.

230 and that prescribing practice based on this terminology may lead to the use of inappropriately exces

231 The use of standardized terminology may then allow for a better inter-study comp

232 STROME-ID addresses terminology, measures of genetic diversity within pathog

233 We propose terminology more appropriate to the supramolecular inter

234 Regarding terminology, myocarditis can be characterized according

235 coding system to record standardized nursing terminology names, publication year, country, and study

236 Terminologies of ovary development, by somewhat subjecti

237 Based on the results, we give new terminologies of the organ, presenting a schematic diagr

238 ve for Asthma guidelines use the traditional terminology of "low," "medium," and "high" doses of inha

239 Despite the misleading terminology of a so-called dormant state associated with

240 iterature a body of published work using the terminology of macrophage polarization, most commonly in

241 g concluded that the development of a common terminology of procedures, summarized under the acronym

242 d acknowledging the terrifying and ambiguous terminology of rejection.

243 ding on the number of symptoms assessed, and terminology of symptoms is not consistent.

244 Terminology on evaluation forms is sometimes so difficul

245 d as a practical guide to demystify existing terminology on the market that may create interest aroun

246 ed in formulating recommendations related to terminology or definitions or in those based purely on e

247 ered by the inconsistent or incorrect use of terminology or methods for technical performance and sta

248 e variety of human neuroscience concepts and terminology poses a fundamental challenge to relating br

249 ere paid by Medicare, for Current Procedural Terminology procedures independently billed by mid-level

250 he advantages and disadvantages of a unified terminology, propose a definition and categorization fra

251 veal that the number of standardized nursing terminology publications increased primarily since 2000

252 for PRO analysis, standardising statistical terminology related to missing data, and determining app

253 ensus document aimed to summarize the common terminology related to myocarditis meanwhile highlightin

254 in an emerging research field, an ambiguous terminology results in confusion and miscommunication th

255 introduction to HMMs, establish some common terminology, review the immense scope of HMMs for applie

256 Our recommendations include: terminology revision from new-onset diabetes after trans

257 and 8.0% on two or more standardized nursing terminology sets.

258 The proposed "consensus" terminology should enable to better compare the many var

259 continue to strengthen standardized nursing terminology study designs to promote continuous improvem

260 Clinicians should clearly understand terminology such as tolerance, dependence, abuse, and ad

261 nt of a standardized structural neuroscience terminology, such as those long employed successfully in

262 Now, terminology suggesting established meaningful pathways o

263 listic model for the construction of synonym terminologies that is capable of handling a wide range o

264 y (GO) provides biologists with a controlled terminology that describes how genes are associated with

265 We adopt a set of terminology that describes water molecules as being "hot

266 intentional change" should preferably have a terminology that distinguishes between genetic changes a

267 Indeed, EVs (a terminology that encompasses microparticles, exosomes, a

268 We review the terminology that may cause confusion and lead to unneces

269 r disease (NAFLD) and provide suggestions on terminology that more accurately reflects pathogenesis a

270 This may be due to the overuse of terminology that stresses regulatory sanctions and thus

271 ttee on MR Safety, has proposed standardized terminology that will contribute to greater safety and u

272 rnative genetic decoding and expand existing terminology to accommodate recently discovered manifesta

273 ed nurses' documentation (n=54), mapping one terminology to another (n=58), implementation of standar

274 , and spatiotemporally dynamics and use this terminology to categorize existing approaches.

275 ghting the need for a clinical framework and terminology to define these patients, who may have under

276 diseases depend on the adoption of a unified terminology to describe EMT.

277 ogenitor cell hierarchy and we suggest a new terminology to distinguish these cells.

278 riables; and uses standardized structure and terminology to simplify review and communication to a br

279 be detected in treated AML patients, propose terminology to standardize nomenclature in this setting,

280 We also clarify terminology, to distinguish between developmental cell d

281 among terms in any domain that reflects the terminology usage in source literature and based on mult

282 nions of different domain experts and in the terminology usages in source literature are rarely addre

283 f respondents were partially aware of common terminologies used in CBCT.

284 It also underscores the importance that the terminology used for each target accurately reflects its

285 to familiarize surgeons with techniques and terminology used in decision analytic papers, to provide

286 , we provide an overview of the concepts and terminology used in machine learning literature, which e

287 hologists when there are questions regarding terminology used in pathology reports; when there is the

288 amiliar with the specific definitions of the terminology used in the field to keep up with surgical r

289 Study design and terminology used in this rapidly evolving, highly multid

290 care and research will help standardize the terminology used to describe anaphylaxis outcomes and se

291 xt we propose clarifications to the existing terminology used to describe the many facets of neutroph

292 A standardized terminology was recommended recently for common age-rela

293 andardized continuous electroencephalography terminology, we aimed to describe the prevalence and bur

294 After clarifying the existing terminology, we elaborate an operational definition of p

295 Although there is no consensus on terminology, we refer to these patients as "unrepresente

296 Using popular terminology, what forms of peptide synthesis are appropr

297 In this review, we describe relevant TEP terminologies while critically discussing TEP biological

298 A modification of the Ann Arbor descriptive terminology will be used for anatomic distribution of di

299 Such a terminology will provide researchers with lots of valuab

300 demonstrated that combining MedDRA standard terminologies with data mining techniques facilitated co