ライフサイエンスコーパス: retest

1 ay were immediately prompted to practice and retest.

2 due to training still observable at a 1 week retest.

3 w noninvasive, rapid scanning with good test-retest.

4 is similar to the agreement on Stratus test-retest.

5 ssed by a masked examiner and confirmed by a retest.

6 uisition, and greater improvement at the 6 h retest.

7 ontrol), 25%, 50%, and 75%, and the function retested.

8 22.3% of men and 38.0% of nonpregnant women retested.

9 s of children (12 preterm, 12 controls) were retested.

10 toxic lesions of BLA or OFC, followed by RDT retesting.

11 ivity and high conversion/reversion rates on retesting.

12 onidine 0.15% for 8 weeks and designated for retesting.

13 ontrols from two centers; a subset underwent retesting.

14 udy period, 25% of which (n = 360) underwent retesting.

15 initially increased CTCs, 31 (10%) were not retested, 165 were assigned to arm B, and 123 were rando

16 iple metastases underwent 2 whole-body (test-retest) (18)F-NaF PET/CT scans 3 +/- 2 d apart from 1 of

17 rticipated in this study ((18)F-MNI-654 test-retest, 2 men; (18)F-MNI-659 test-retest, 4 men and 1 wo

18 weight +/- 2 [range, 34-37 mmol/kg]; for the retest, 37 mmol/kg +/- 1 [range, 35-39 mmol/kg]; P = .61

19 I-654 test-retest, 2 men; (18)F-MNI-659 test-retest, 4 men and 1 woman; (18)F-MNI-659 dosimetry, 2 me

20 (49%) CIA(+)/RPR(-)/TP-PA(-) women who were retested, 53% became CIA(-).

21 18 (77.1%), respectively, were negative when retested 6 months later.

22 ivocal) GM-EIA results, reducing the need to retest a significant proportion of samples.

23 s," prediction accuracy is close to the test-retest accuracy of a standard personality test.

24 e, and for counseling individuals on when to retest after an exposure.

25 during a baseline placebo run-in period and retested after 28-days of drug (n = 21) or placebo (n =

26 They were retested after 8 h of wakefulness or sleep, respectively

27 s I HLA single antigen flow beads assay were retested after acid treatment of the beads.

28 Neither the 2-step TST nor systematic retesting after negative baseline testing is justified.

29 Clear guidelines are needed for retesting alongside improved diagnostic tests.

30 Test-retest analyses demonstrated low variability in flortauc

31 Test-retest analysis demonstrated a high level of reliability

32 Test-retest analysis showed high repeatability between scans

33 We conducted a Linear Array test/retest analysis using cytologic specimens from 198 women

34 digital algorithmic modification and a test-retest analysis.

35 ere the most reproducible, including at test-retest and at expert versus trainee comparisons.

36 Test-retest and inter-rater reliability, construct validity (

37 diagnostic category, and management for test-retest and interrater reliability.

38 Coded retesting and testing with an alternative target PCR ass

39 measurements were highly reproducible (test-retest), and both small-animal PET and beta-microprobes

40 +/- 0.52 mL/cm(3) (mean +/- SD; n = 4; test-retest), and the reproducibility in test-retest studies

41 Family members are retested, and one member who previously tested negative

42 ively in all animals and in a subset of test-retest animals using a network quantification approach.

43 Too few persons were retested as recommended, and interventions are needed to

44 as there were no changes in control subjects retested at 12-month interval.

45 d studies of chlamydia-infected men who were retested at a later date without having received treatme

46 (+)/RPR(-)/TP-PA(-); more than half who were retested became CIA(-).

47 1) reliability (stability of criteria during retesting, between raters, over time, and across setting

48 les had discrepant results; all of them were retested by additional laboratory testing.

49 ted positive for cytomegalovirus (CMV), were retested by five different laboratories, each using a di

50 Pre-LTx sera from these patients were retested by Luminex assay.

51 13 were treated with 1 g of azithromycin and retested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on days 14 a

52 The aim of this study was to determine test-retest characteristics and variability of SMGU within an

53 t metrics, RVESRI demonstrated the best test-retest characteristics.

54 A test-retest cohort contained 5 reliable visual fields, within

55 served with small-animal PET in the test and retest conditions on the one hand and the NAc and MK-801

56 nt change were defined as exceeding 95% test-retest confidence limits based upon the mean sensitivity

57 raclass correlation coefficient values (test-retest consistency) were greater than 0.92 for all regio

58 Therefore, this group acts as a test-retest control for the primary outcome measure examined

59 l groups; 90 participants were assigned to a retest control that did not complete the main outcome me

60 Test-retest correlation coefficients were 0.7 for PPC and 0.5

61 rted unnecessary ART costs were greater than retesting costs within 1 year using assumptions represen

62 tested with full cycloplegic correction when retest criteria were met.

63 The level of agreement between test-retest data and reliability was assessed using Bland-Alt

64 these results was also observed in a second retest dataset, demonstrating the robustness of our find

65 dentified prospectively acquired PET/CT test-retest datasets of 74 patients from multicenter Merck an

66 dentified prospectively acquired PET/CT test-retest datasets of 74 patients from multicenter Merck an

67 In a test-retest design (3- to 5-week interval) adults with persis

68 A test-retest design was used to assess patients with MDD in an

69 ce of the choice of outcome measures in test-retest designs.

70 15% had a test-retest difference higher than +/- 3 mmHg; Bland-Altman 9

71 Test-retest difference with ART fell within +/-1 mmHg in 41%

72 Thus, 95% of all test-retest differences fall within +/- 0.43 degrees (124 mum

73 The mean (SD) for test-retest differences in EZ width was 0.08 degrees (0.22 de

74 Test-retest differences were normally distributed, and the ma

75 The effects of paired stimulation were retested during visual and auditory reaction-time tasks

76 Two (test-retest) dynamic (11)C-laniquidar PET scans were obtained

77 f early parafoveal damage and is prepared to retest fields and add objective tests.

78 te difference of the area of EZ loss on test-retest for the first grader was 0.12 +/- 0.10 mm(2), and

79 Eighty-two available samples were retested for antibodies to N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor

80 All samples were tested/retested for antibodies to N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor

81 elic replacement, and resultant mutants were retested for fitness in the mice.

82 al consistency (Cronbach's test > 0.84, test-retest > 0.7), reliability (>0.9), and acceptability.

83 ed (R(2) >/= 0.926; P < 0.00005) in the test-retest hemispheres.

84 We compared estimated costs of retesting human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive pe

85 Follow-up (retest) imaging occurred between 48 h and 4 wk after ini

86 The predictive score was rebuilt and retested in 10 000 training and test sets randomly gener

87 , first tested in 1947 (age = 11 years), and retested in 2008-2010.

88 myelin and neuronal antigens were tested or retested in all samples.

89 Each child was tested at school Grade 2 and retested in Grades 4 and 6.

90 e affects social interactions when fish were retested in groups of 2 and 4.

91 munotherapy (POIT) were depleted of IgG4 and retested in inhibition assays.

92 s latter result was unexpected and should be retested in other populations.

93 he samples in positive pool samples are then retested individually to identify the patients with the

94 for outpatient follow-up, with a median test-retest interval of 11 months.

95 ient or an informant before the test and the retest interviews, which were conducted from 4 hours to

96 The median (interquartile range) test-retest intraclass correlation was 0.69 (0.57-0.79) and 0

97 Excellent test-retest (intraclass correlation, 0.89-0.99 across studies

98 ed features were also highly stable for test-retest (mean +/- std: ICC = 0.96 +/- 0.06).

99 greement (LOA) of the ratio between test and retest measurements was calculated.

100 A good agreement was found between test-retest measurements.

101 and patient adherence to recommendations for retesting men and women with positive tests.

102 a selected treatment (n = 3); second, a test-retest (n = 12) small-animal PET experiment (1 h scan; 2

103 Retesting occurred 1 month later to assess fear renewal

104 A total of 250 parents completed the retest of the FASE-P.

105 Retesting of all men and women with a positive test is r

106 lidation with experimental samples, (ii) DS2 retesting of case-defined clinical samples, and (iii) a

107 opsy for confirmation of disease process and retesting of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, a

108 Retesting of HIV-1 RNA by TaqMan 2.0 confirmed the disco

109 Retesting of stored study specimens could not confirm th

110 Discrepant results were resolved by retesting of the same specimen by an alternative molecul

111 Retesting of the synthetic eupalinilide E confirmed the

112 Participants were retested on both sequences the following day during fMRI

113 Of the 82 sCJD sera retested, one had VGKC-complex antibodies confirming the

114 of pregnant women with a positive test were retested, only 22.0% received a test-of-cure within the

115 Among retested patients, the risk of repeat positive test was

116 3 LTBI screening strategies and the need for retesting patients with negative results at baseline.

117 data can be used to assess whether physician-retesting patterns are in line with established guidelin

118 ignificantly improved without affecting test-retest performance.

119 y fP (VT/fP or BPF) did not improve the test-retest performance.

120 lation coefficient were used to explore test-retest performance.

121 Test-retest PET imaging, blocking with AT1R antagonist candes

122 e same with both labels, but fewer relatives retested positive with truncated GAD.

123 h maximum stress perfusion and CFR, (2) test-retest precision in same subject, (3) stress perfusion a

124 465 patients had positive results because of retesting prompted by LSG-qPCR positivity.

125 healthy male subjects participated in a test-retest protocol with dynamic scans and metabolite-correc

126 Retesting rates of persons with a positive test were sub

127 In adults, test-retest reliabilities of the cross-cutting symptom items

128 The internal consistency and test-retest reliabilities of the module were adequate.

129 scales in all clinical settings), high test-retest reliability (>0.76 for all domains), high respons

130 al consistency reliability (alpha=.85); test-retest reliability (ICC=.76); and convergent (r=.81 with

131 ility (Cronbach's alpha=0.81 vs. 0.88); test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0

132 sistent (Cronbach alpha=0.84), had good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0

133 (Cronbach alpha coefficient, 0.84) and test-retest reliability (mean percentage variation, 0.92).

134 .97), feasibility (97% completion), and test-retest reliability (r = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.80) were de

135 dality that exhibits variable levels of test-retest reliability across space.

136 sity hospital; voxel-based morphometry; test-retest reliability analysis of striatal activations in a

137 resampling of words does not affect the test-retest reliability and diagnostic value of the CNC word

138 The VCDQ had excellent test-retest reliability and differentiated VCD vs. healthy (M

139 The DQ has excellent test-retest reliability and responsiveness, and may be useful

140 Test-retest reliability and the rate of progression were calc

141 Test-retest reliability at a 48-hour interval was supported b

142 ch's alpha and item-total correlations; test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient

143 The test-retest reliability demonstrated very good reproducibilit

144 The test-retest reliability demonstrated very good reproducibilit

145 Field Trials were conducted by using a test-retest reliability design with a stratified sampling app

146 SLS I and II (N=300), we evaluated the test-retest reliability for FVC% predicted (FVC%; screening v

147 Test-retest reliability for mean total SWV (MTSWV) was good f

148 Test-retest reliability for the thresholds from the sweep pro

149 Test-retest reliability in controls and those without previou

150 he aim of this study was to measure the test-retest reliability of (11)C-N,N-dimethyl-2-(2'-amino-4'-

151 development, descriptive statistics,and test-retest reliability of cross-cutting symptom measures pro

152 We assessed the test-retest reliability of high spatial resolution diffusion

153 Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of RCAT scores were 0.77 and 0.78, re

154 addition, the known-groups validity and test-retest reliability of the AAS were found to be good.

155 Good test-retest reliability of the method was demonstrated by the

156 compared to standard tones, and a high test-retest reliability of the P300 amplitude (r > = .74).

157 Validity and test-retest reliability of the questionnaire was excellent (C

158 Moreover, the test-retest reliability of working-memory related connectivit

159 The kappa coefficient for test-retest reliability ranged from 0.47 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.5

160 These results show promising test-retest reliability results for this group of assessments

161 Test-retest reliability was 0.7 or greater for 36 of 49 presp

162 The test-retest reliability was 0.975 for the rings and 0.979 for

163 Test-retest reliability was analyzed with an independent samp

164 14-day test-retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlatio

165 Test-retest reliability was assessed in 4 subjects.

166 Test-retest reliability was good.

167 Good-to-excellent test-retest reliability was observed for SERT binding in the

168 There was excellent test-retest reliability with an ICC of 0.89 (95% confidence i

169 ability (i.e., internal consistency and test-retest reliability) and validity (i.e., convergent, conc

170 the intraclass correlation coefficient (test-retest reliability) for repeated questionnaires among st

171 To assess test-retest reliability, 117 adults with diplopic strabismus.

172 For test-retest reliability, 95% limits of agreement and intracla

173 CAINS structure, interrater agreement, test-retest reliability, and convergent and discriminant vali

174 rtest agreement, intergrader agreement, test-retest reliability, and the time taken to grade using th

175 FVC% has acceptable test-retest reliability, and we have provided the MCID estima

176 esults demonstrated that, ensuring high data retest reliability, four cingulate subregions discerning

177 ility of this phenotype, we studied its test-retest reliability, its potential brain structural contr

178 coronary artery disease (CAD) with high test-retest reliability, predictive power, and responsiveness

179 ontained sufficient data on inter-rater/test-retest reliability, responsiveness, and feasibility.

180 ility of data once collected, including test-retest reliability, split-half reliability, and Cronbach

181 pupillometer examinations to determine test-retest reliability.

182 ects, and all statements had acceptable test-retest reliability.

183 e (ICC = 0.58) showed clinically useful test-retest reliability.

184 d ceiling effects, and Spearman rho for test-retest reliability.

185 traditional Psi method, with excellent test-retest reliability.

186 n-groups validity, as well as excellent test-retest reliability.

187 e for a nominal effect of rTMS and poor test-retest reliability.

188 Both tests had high test-retest reliability.

189 als with minimal training and show high test-retest reliability.

190 intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability.

191 ), a valid total score and an excellent test-retest reliability.

192 ency, (Cronbach's alpha coefficient and test-retest), reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient

193 ed with trait anxiety scores (P = .04), test-retest reliable (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.

194 The test-retest repeatability (n = 9) of Patlak influx constant K

195 Test-retest repeatability across the various manufacturer, fi

196 and coefficients of variation (COV) and test-retest repeatability as visualized by Bland-Altman analy

197 the pons as a reference region, with a test-retest repeatability of 7%.

198 The short-term test-retest repeatability of hyperpolarized gas MR imaging of

199 Conclusion: The test-retest repeatability of shape and heterogeneity features

200 The test-retest repeatability of shape and heterogeneity features

201 es of SUVs: SUV, SUVAUC, and SUVTBR The test-retest repeatability of these metrics, as well as metabo

202 ories, we have designed and completed a test-retest repeatability study for differential HDX-MS exper

203 Test-retest repeatability was assessed in 74 patients (34 fro

204 fied with SUVmax, SUVmean, and SUVtotal Test-retest repeatability was assessed using Bland-Altman ana

205 sing both common and novel measures for test-retest repeatability, however, the quick CSF delivers mo

206 PERSI showed superior test-retest reproducibility (1.84%) and group separation abil

207 Results For test-retest reproducibility analysis and inter- and intraoper

208 ree separate analyses were performed: a test-retest reproducibility analysis, where each of the first

209 nal PET scan was performed to calculate test-retest reproducibility and reliability.

210 Significant test-retest reproducibility for flortaucipir F 18 was found a

211 ced diffusion MRI has good to excellent test-retest reproducibility in both human cTBI patients and c

212 yl]-3 ,5-dimethyl-pyridine) and studied test-retest reproducibility in healthy volunteers.

213 Test-retest reproducibility in the thalamus was more than 90%

214 The test-retest reproducibility of (123)I-CLINDE is comparable or

215 Conclusion: The test-retest reproducibility of (123)I-CLINDE is comparable or

216 study reports the first data regarding test-retest reproducibility of flortaucipir F 18 PET.

217 Test-retest reproducibility was evaluated in 5 subjects.

218 Test-retest reproducibility was higher in subjects with immed

219 HC group test-retest results showed decreased ventromedial prefrontal

220 Discrepancy analysis using results for retested samples from a second NAAT (Xpert C. difficile/

221 Ten of these subjects also underwent a retest scan on the same day.

222 Four volunteers (2 men, 2 women) underwent retest scanning, with a mean interscan interval of 37 d.

223 The correlation between test and retest scans was strong for all uptake measures at eithe

224 Additionally, test-retest scans were obtained in 6 animals.

225 background, was 5.7 and 6.1 mL for test and retest scans, respectively, with a relative LOA limit of

226 The study consisted of 3 parts: test-retest scans; self-saturation to estimate the tracer's i

227 y comparing original test scores with 2-week retest scores.

228 ical P value CritIndex, such that 5% of test-retest series showed significant deterioration with P <

229 confirmed that performance of the task at a retest session after sleep significantly increased compa

230 ace recognition memory that is stable across retest sessions and correlates strongly with loss of hip

231 Test-retest stability of global visual field indices was asse

232 demonstrated good internal consistency, test-retest stability, and interrater agreement.

233 liability of lesion SUVs, notably their test-retest stability, thus becomes crucial.

234 Multiple test-retest studies have been performed to assess SUV repeata

235 Test-retest studies involve repeated scanning of the same pat

236 est-retest), and the reproducibility in test-retest studies was 10.4% +/- 6.5% (mean +/- SD).

237 cibility of network activity in a small test-retest study.

238 ts were enrolled, all of whom had pathologic retesting that confirmed HER2-negative primary breast ca

239 neralized SAD and healthy control groups; 2) retested the findings in an independent clinical sample;

240 ples with discordant or invalid results were retested, the agreement increased to 100%.

241 rom the patient's primary breast cancer were retested to confirm HER2-negative disease.

242 Global and regional test-retest (TRT) variability was determined for both plasma

243 In addition, global and regional test-retest (TRT) variability was determined for parametric K

244 eading to aversive emotional experiences, we retested two of these patients (B.G. and A.M.) to examin

245 D of mean percentage change between test and retest using the PERSI reference region was 2.22% for a

246 Pretransplant sera were retested using a modified (SAFB) assay, which detects th

247 nstrated satisfactory reliability, with test-retest VA scores having a mean difference of 0.001 (SD +

248 , correlation coefficient analysis, and test-retest validation were conducted.

249 evealed excellent agreement between test and retest values.

250 Similar test-retest variabilities and clinical group separations were

251 es take into account expected localized test-retest variabilities in sensitivity, and trend-based ana

252 diameter and vertical diameter had low test-retest variabilities of 8.9%, 9.5%, and 9.6%, respective

253 owed excellent reproducibility of BPND (test-retest variability < 10%) in the nAChR-rich brain region

254 (Akaike preference, 43.6%), acceptable test-retest variability (12%), no dependence on perfusion cha

255 cibility was observed in the calculated test-retest variability (7.2% +/- 0.75%).

256 a recent study demonstrated substantial test-retest variability (TRV) in SUVs.

257 The relative and absolute test-retest variability and intraclass correlation coefficien

258 Peek Acuity was compared, in terms of test-retest variability and measurement time, with the Snelle

259 (18)F-MNI698 test-retest variability and upper mass dose limits were deter

260 clinical studies including analysis of test-retest variability are essential to determine sensitivit

261 -monitoring device by measuring the device's retest variability at 2 months in a cohort of 43 patient

262 rformance was evaluated with respect to test-retest variability in a phase 2 study of 21 subjects (5-

263 Test-retest variability in high-binding regions (striatum) wa

264 Average test-retest variability in the striatum was 4.8%, 3.5%, and 6

265 Test-retest variability in the whole brain (excluding the cer

266 orting noninvasive quantification, with test-retest variability less than 10% and intraclass correlat

267 The test-retest variability of (11)C-(+)-PHNO BP(ND) was 9% in D2

268 For both models, the test-retest variability of (11)C-laniquidar rate constant for

269 The test-retest variability of (11)C-LY2795050 for VT was no more

270 he aim of this study was to examine the test-retest variability of (123)I-CLINDE binding in healthy s

271 To examine the test-retest variability of (18)F-mefway, a second PET scan wa

272 right lung regions of interest, with a test-retest variability of -6% (MA1, n = 1) or -1% +/- 14% (E

273 This PBIF was used to assess the retest variability of [(18)F]FMPEP-d 2, and then to quan

274 s consistent with published data on the test-retest variability of acuities measured using 5-letter-p

275 In both cases, the test-retest variability of K1 was approximately 19%.

276 ed in A2A-rich regions, with an average test-retest variability of less than 10%.

277 al for (18)F-FPEB; it showed acceptable test-retest variability of nondisplaceable binding potential

278 The 95% CI limits for test-retest variability of smartphone acuity data were +/-0.0

279 Test-retest variability was 5%-19% for 2T VT and 5%-12% for B

280 Average test-retest variability was 8%.

281 r binding potential (BPND and BPP), the test-retest variability was good in regions of moderate and h

282 Test-retest variability was measured by percentage difference

283 Inter-, intra-, and test-retest variability were assessed in a subgroup.

284 progression, symmetry between eyes, and test-retest variability were quantified.

285 atched that from the bolus application (test-retest variability, 1.1% +/- 24.7%), which was not the c

286 or showing improvement in HRQOL beyond test-retest variability.

287 1)C-laniquidar uptake and to assess its test-retest variability.

288 sease process and aid efforts to reduce test-retest variability.

289 st intra- and inter-observer as well as test-retest variability.

290 ptake and to examine the within-subject test-retest variability.

291 t (Bland-Altman and weighted kappa) and test-retest variability.

292 In a subsequent retest we asked, for the first time, whether young child

293 e also demonstrated high reliability at test-retest with narrow limits of agreement and no statistica

294 say and been found to be negative, should be retested with a fluorescence-activated cell sorting assa

295 All discordant cases were retested with an enzyme immunoassay followed by Western

296 HOTV letter protocol without correction, and retested with full cycloplegic correction when retest cr

297 specimens from "seronegative" patients were retested with recombinant human AQP4-based assays, inclu

298 ic autorefraction, fundus evaluation, and VA retesting with refractive correction.

299 of borderline high cholesterol patients are retested within the 3 year recommended period, however l

300 ably across 4 sites, and scanned twice (test-retest) within 7 days.