Sentences with phrase «difference in the outcome for»

The difference in outcomes for the two simulations represents the burden of suboptimal breastfeeding if observed associations between lactation and maternal health outcomes are causal.

Women who have a CNM with them during labor and delivery have fewer interventions, such as continuous electronic fetal monitoring, epidurals, and episiotomies, without any difference in the outcomes for women or their babies.

Our tests can make a difference in the outcome for each patient by identifying how an individual patient will respond to a given therapy.

Reducingstereotype.org concludes, «This re-analysis suggests that soliciting social - identity information prior to test taking does produce small differences in performance consistent with previous findings in the stereotype - threat literature that, when generalized to the population of test takers, can produce profound differences in outcomes for members of different groups.»

It is time to invest in our school leaders if we are to make a real difference in outcomes for our students.

Does school diversity make a difference in outcomes for students?

Using statewide longitudinal data, the study analyzes dual - credit participation rates by race / ethnicity, gender and math and reading achievement on state tests and examines differences in outcomes for dual - credit participants and nonparticipants.

«Never have we been more optimistic about transforming achievement and making a real and measurable difference in the outcomes for students — in their academic pursuits, in their careers, and in their contributions to our nation and to their own communities.»

For instance, if there is a set of classrooms that are using some new piece of educational software, we should be able to go out and find other classrooms that have very similar students, that have students with similar prior achievement, similar demographics and so forth, and then just track them over time and just automatically report the differences in outcomes for the students receiving the software and then the comparison group of students that aren't.

Quick action can make a big difference in the outcome for your pet.

My dog Puma was put on an osteosarcoma clinical after his leg was amputated to determine if there was a difference in outcome for dogs who received chemotherapy the day after surgery vs. waiting a week.

The vast difference in outcomes for defendants assigned different counsel types raises important questions about the adequacy and fairness of the criminal justice system.

Previous research has found that exposure to poor maternal mental health in the early years can have a range of impacts on child behavioural, emotional, social and cognitive outcomes, and that there may be differences in outcomes for those exposed to brief or long - standing maternal mental ill health.

ABFT, however, is a 12 - week program; thus, it is only possible to test for differences in the outcomes for the waitlist control group with those of the ABFT group at six weeks, one - half of the full duration of ABFT.

Years of research, including the longitudinal studies by Kelly & Wallerstein, as well as work by Kelly & Emery 2003, Hetherington & Kelly 2002, and Amato 2000 point to the differences in outcomes for children who come from divorced families.

Not exact matches

Our main message is that developing a theory of time allocation and occupational choice is important for understanding the forces that shape gender differences in labor market outcomes,» the researchers from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, University of Toronto and Princeton University write.

[01:10] Introduction [02:45] James welcomes Tony to the podcast [03:35] Tony's leap year birthday [04:15] Unshakeable delivers the specific facts you need to know [04:45] What James learned from Unshakeable [05:25] Most people panic when the stock market drops [05:45] Getting rid of your fear of investing [06:15] Last January was the worst opening, but it was a correction [06:45] You are losing money when you sell on corrections [06:55] Bear markets come every 5 years on average [07:10] The greatest opportunity for a millennial [07:40] Waiting for corrections to invest [08:05] Warren Buffet's advice for investors [08:55] If you miss the top 10 trading days a year... [09:25] Three different investor scenarios over a 20 year period [10:40] The best trading days come after the worst [11:45] Investing in the current world [12:05] What Clinton and Bush think of the current situation [12:45] The office is far bigger than the occupant [13:35] Information helps reduce fear [14:25] James's story of the billionaire upset over another's wealth [14:45] What money really is [15:05] The story of Adolphe Merkle [16:05] The story of Chuck Feeney [16:55] The importance of the right mindset [17:15] What fuels Tony [19:15] Find something you care about more than yourself [20:25] Make your mission to surround yourself with the right people [21:25] Suffering made Tony hungry for more [23:25] By feeding his mind, Tony found strength [24:15] Great ideas don't interrupt you, you have to pursue them [25:05] Never - ending hunger is what matters [25:25] Richard Branson is the epitome of hunger and drive [25:40] Hunger is the common denominator [26:30] What you can do starting right now [26:55] Success leaves clues [28:10] What it means to take massive action [28:30] Taking action commits you to following through [29:40] If you do nothing you'll learn nothing [30:20] There must be an emotional purpose behind what you're doing [30:40] How does Tony ignite creativity in his own life [32:00] «How is not as important as «why» [32:40] What and why unleash the psyche [33:25] Breaking the habit of focusing on «how» [35:50] Deep Practice [35:10] Your desired outcome will determine your action [36:00] The difference between «what» and «why» [37:00] Learning how to chunk and group [37:40] Don't mistake movement for achievement [38:30] Tony doesn't negotiate with his mind [39:30] Change your thoughts and change your biochemistry [40:00] The bad habit of being stressed [40:40] Beautiful and suffering states [41:50] The most important decision is to live in a beautiful state no matter what [42:40] Consciously decide to take yourself out of suffering [43:40] Focus on appreciation, joy and love [44:30] Step out of suffering and find the solution [45:00] Dealing with mercury poisoning [45:40] Tony's process for stepping out of suffering [46:10] Stop identifying with thoughts — they aren't yours [47:40] Trade your expectations for appreciation [50:00] The key to life — gratitude [51:40] What is freedom for you?

The difference between the two is in the reason for the determined outcome.

Just published in the journal the most careful, rigorous, and methodologically sound study ever conducted on this issue found numerous and significant differences between these groups — with the outcomes for children of h0m0 rated «suboptimal in almost every category

I want to be heard look him in the eye and say you could have made a difference for good and you could have improved the outcome for my three children (and still can) and yet chose to do nothing.

In the study that established the difference, researchers looking at people two years after they first showed up at a hospital for care found that they scored significantly better on most outcome measures than a comparable group in the West..In the study that established the difference, researchers looking at people two years after they first showed up at a hospital for care found that they scored significantly better on most outcome measures than a comparable group in the West..in the West....

Amazingly, some extraordinarily courageous individuals (initially Arnold himself, journalists David Quinn and Breda O'Brien, the Iona Institute; later on, John Waters, retired Regius Professor of Laws at Trinity College Dublin, William Binchy and the distinguished historian Prof. John A. Murphy; the gay campaigners for a «No» vote, Paddy Manning and Keith Mills, deserve special mention) did succeed in making a difference to the eventual numbers, although not the outcome: in the early Spring, polls indicated that 17 percent of the electorate would vote against the amendment, but by the time the actual referendum came around, 38 percent were indicating a «No» vote, and that was the eventual outcome.

But whether or not the dissent, cast in those terms, would have caused Stewart or other justices to peel away from the majority; whether or not it would have made any difference to the outcome of that case; it would have made the most profound difference for the coherence of conservative jurisprudence.

MMA is a sport for sure but UFC is here to produce entertainment content in the form of combat fighting, they try to «regulate» it and «administer» it as much as possible so it appears like a sport (e.g. fake rankings that no one know how it works), reebok deal etc. but at the end of the day it is a entertainment show similar to WWE, the only difference being that as long as fighters to rig the fights, the UFC can not determine the outcome...

But there isn't yet clear scientific data that measures how much of a difference Baby College makes in outcomes for children.

However, recent practice suggests that if professionals systematically gather the young men's details by, for instance, routinely asking the mothers for them early in the pregnancy, develop interagency working while making child outcomes the focus of their work and mainstream engagement through the service (in this case, a teenage pregnancy service) while keeping good records and comprehensively assessing the young men's needs substantial numbers of young fathers can be reached with interventions that make a real difference.

The pregnancy diet Bradley recommends (very healthy, high in protein) makes a big difference in health for the baby and mother and helps with a good birth outcome.

Flint and colleagues suggested that when midwives get to know the women for whom they provide care, interventions are minimised.22 The Albany midwifery practice, with an unselected population, has a rate for normal vaginal births of 77 %, with 35 % of women having a home birth.23 A review of care for women at low risk of complications has shown that continuity of midwifery care is generally associated with lower intervention rates than standard maternity care.24 Variation in normal birth rates between services (62 % -80 %), however, seems to be greater than outcome differences between «high continuity» and «traditional care» groups at the same unit.25 26 27 Use of epidural analgesia, for example, varies widely between Queen Charlotte's Hospital, London, and the North Staffordshire NHS Trust.

Midwives usually only address this on a superficial level when discussing settings («there is no significant difference in outcomes» etc etc) and that is good enough for most women.

Overall, there were no significant differences in the odds of the primary outcome for births planned in any of the non-obstetric unit settings compared with planned births in obstetric units (table 3 ⇑).

RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between the groups in baseline characteristics, obstetrical and perinatal outcomes; however, there was a preference among women in both groups for the upright position.

There were no significant differences in outcome of home or hospital births attended by midwives for the other child health measures.

For the restricted sample of women without any complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the odds of a primary outcome event were higher for births planned at home compared with planned obstetric unit births (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52) but there was no evidence of a difference for either freestanding or alongside midwifery units compared with obstetric uniFor the restricted sample of women without any complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the odds of a primary outcome event were higher for births planned at home compared with planned obstetric unit births (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52) but there was no evidence of a difference for either freestanding or alongside midwifery units compared with obstetric unifor births planned at home compared with planned obstetric unit births (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52) but there was no evidence of a difference for either freestanding or alongside midwifery units compared with obstetric unifor either freestanding or alongside midwifery units compared with obstetric units.

For multiparous women there was no evidence of a difference in the primary outcome by planned place of birth.

For healthy multiparous women with a low risk pregnancy, there are no differences in adverse perinatal outcomes between planned births at home or in a midwifery unit compared with planned births in an obstetric unit

For multiparous women, there were no significant differences in the primary outcome between birth settings.

Overall, there were no significant differences in the adjusted odds of the primary outcome for any of the non-obstetric unit settings compared with obstetric units.

The strengths of the study include the ability to compare outcomes by the woman's planned place of birth at the start of care in labour, the high participation of midwifery units and trusts in England, the large sample size and statistical power to detect clinically important differences in adverse perinatal outcomes, the minimisation of selection bias through achievement of a high response rate and absence of self selection bias due to non-consent, the ability to compare groups that were similar in terms of identified clinical risk (according to current clinical guidelines) and to further increase the comparability of the groups by conducting an additional analysis restricted to women with no complicating conditions identified at the start of care in labour, and the ability to control for several important potential confounders.

Most studies of homebirth in other countries have found no statistically significant differences in perinatal outcomes between home and hospital births for women at low risk of complications.36, 37,39 However, a recent study in the United States showed poorer neonatal outcomes for births occurring at home or in birth centres.40 A meta - analysis in the same year demonstrated higher perinatal mortality associated with homebirth41 but has been strongly criticised on methodological grounds.5, 42 The Birthplace in England study, 43 the largest prospective cohort study on place of birth for women at low risk of complications, analysed a composite outcome, which included stillbirth and early neonatal death among other serious morbidity.

The analysis by parity indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in adverse neonatal outcomes for nulliparous women although the numbers are much smaller than the Birthplace in England study.

In the only controlled, randomized scientific study to compare graduated extinction and «positive routines» head - to - head, there were no significant differences in treatment outcomes for kids (Adams and Rickert 1989In the only controlled, randomized scientific study to compare graduated extinction and «positive routines» head - to - head, there were no significant differences in treatment outcomes for kids (Adams and Rickert 1989in treatment outcomes for kids (Adams and Rickert 1989).

Rates of obstetrical intervention are high in U.S. hospitals, and we found large absolute differences in the risks of these interventions between planned out - of - hospital births and in - hospital births.38 In contrast, serious adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes are infrequent in all the birth settings we assessed, and the absolute differences in risk that we observed between planned birth locations were correspondingly small; for example, planned out - of - hospital births were associated with an excess of less than 1 fetal death per 1000 deliveries in multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analysein U.S. hospitals, and we found large absolute differences in the risks of these interventions between planned out - of - hospital births and in - hospital births.38 In contrast, serious adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes are infrequent in all the birth settings we assessed, and the absolute differences in risk that we observed between planned birth locations were correspondingly small; for example, planned out - of - hospital births were associated with an excess of less than 1 fetal death per 1000 deliveries in multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analysein the risks of these interventions between planned out - of - hospital births and in - hospital births.38 In contrast, serious adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes are infrequent in all the birth settings we assessed, and the absolute differences in risk that we observed between planned birth locations were correspondingly small; for example, planned out - of - hospital births were associated with an excess of less than 1 fetal death per 1000 deliveries in multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analysein - hospital births.38 In contrast, serious adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes are infrequent in all the birth settings we assessed, and the absolute differences in risk that we observed between planned birth locations were correspondingly small; for example, planned out - of - hospital births were associated with an excess of less than 1 fetal death per 1000 deliveries in multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analyseIn contrast, serious adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes are infrequent in all the birth settings we assessed, and the absolute differences in risk that we observed between planned birth locations were correspondingly small; for example, planned out - of - hospital births were associated with an excess of less than 1 fetal death per 1000 deliveries in multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analysein all the birth settings we assessed, and the absolute differences in risk that we observed between planned birth locations were correspondingly small; for example, planned out - of - hospital births were associated with an excess of less than 1 fetal death per 1000 deliveries in multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analysein risk that we observed between planned birth locations were correspondingly small; for example, planned out - of - hospital births were associated with an excess of less than 1 fetal death per 1000 deliveries in multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analysein multivariate and propensity - score - adjusted analyses.

«I think it makes a big difference in the outcome,» said Young, who, as a side note, also is willing to fax clients» records to doctors on call at TGH if they opt for a hospital delivery.

We used multiple regression to estimate the differences in total cost between the settings for birth and to adjust for potential confounders, including maternal age, parity, ethnicity, understanding of English, marital status, BMI, index of multiple deprivation score, parity, and gestational age at birth, which could each be associated with planned place of birth and with adverse outcomes.12 For the generalised linear model on costs, we selected a γ distribution and identity link function in preference to alternative distributional forms and link functions on the basis of its low Akaike's information criterion (AIC) statistfor birth and to adjust for potential confounders, including maternal age, parity, ethnicity, understanding of English, marital status, BMI, index of multiple deprivation score, parity, and gestational age at birth, which could each be associated with planned place of birth and with adverse outcomes.12 For the generalised linear model on costs, we selected a γ distribution and identity link function in preference to alternative distributional forms and link functions on the basis of its low Akaike's information criterion (AIC) statistfor potential confounders, including maternal age, parity, ethnicity, understanding of English, marital status, BMI, index of multiple deprivation score, parity, and gestational age at birth, which could each be associated with planned place of birth and with adverse outcomes.12 For the generalised linear model on costs, we selected a γ distribution and identity link function in preference to alternative distributional forms and link functions on the basis of its low Akaike's information criterion (AIC) statistFor the generalised linear model on costs, we selected a γ distribution and identity link function in preference to alternative distributional forms and link functions on the basis of its low Akaike's information criterion (AIC) statistic.

In a case - control study, researchers identify a group of cases (here, the babies who died of SIDS) and compare them to a control group of babies / families with similar characteristics to find out what could account for differences in outcomes (one group died from SIDS; one did notIn a case - control study, researchers identify a group of cases (here, the babies who died of SIDS) and compare them to a control group of babies / families with similar characteristics to find out what could account for differences in outcomes (one group died from SIDS; one did notin outcomes (one group died from SIDS; one did not).

We also estimated relative indices of inequality (RII) and slope indices of inequality (SII) as summary measures of relative and absolute inequalities of breastfeeding outcomes, respectively, across the entire distribution of maternal education.24 For child IQ, linear regression analyses using GEEs were performed to estimate mean IQ differences in lower maternal education from the reference category in each intervention group and compared between the groups.

These structural differences, including lower gray matter volume, may have implications for developmental outcomes which emerge in the preschool and early childhood period.

No difference in long - term outcomes for planned home versus planned hospital births for multiparous women.

For parents who have the luxury of truly choosing any feeding method, it's fine to choose exclusive pumping in the same way that it's fine to choose formula, as long as they understand the differences in health outcomes.

For the vote - counting exercise a statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) difference in favour of the intervention was considered a positive outcome, a statistically significant difference in favour of control was considered a negative outcome and no statistically significant difference was considered a neutral outcome.