Sentences with phrase «primary measured outcome»

The primary measured outcome was carbon monoxide - confirmed self - reported 7 - day point - prevalence abstinence (the proportion of the study population abstinent at a specific point in time) at 26 weeks.

The primary measured outcome for the study was the difference in maximum treadmill walking distance at 12 months between the groups.

The researchers found that the primary measured outcome, change in peak oxygen uptake (reflects mechanisms by which iron repletion is expected to improve systemic oxygen delivery and use) from study entry to 16 weeks did not significantly differ between the two groups.

Recurrence of an atrial tachyarrhythmia lasting longer than 30 seconds (the primary measured outcome) occurred more often in the antiarrhythmic drug group than in the ablation group, 44 patients (72 percent) vs. 36 patients (55 percent).

Not exact matches

The primary outcome was the mean healthiness of all packaged food purchases over the 4 - wk intervention period, which was measured by using the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion (NPSC).

Main outcome measure A composite primary outcome of perinatal mortality and intrapartum related neonatal morbidities (stillbirth after start of care in labour, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, brachial plexus injury, fractured humerus, or fractured clavicle) was used to compare outcomes by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour (at home, freestanding midwifery units, alongside midwifery units, and obstetric units).

The primary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and specific neonatal morbidities: stillbirth after the start of care in labour, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, brachial plexus injury, fractured humerus, and fractured clavicle.13 This composite measure was designed to capture outcomes that may be related to the quality of intrapartum care, including morbidities associated with intrapartum asphyxia and birth trauma.

Our primary outcome measure was the rate of medical indications during pregnancy.

The definition of low risk used in the cohort study was based on criteria contained in the NICE Intrapartum Care Guidelines.11 The primary clinical outcome was a composite measure of adverse perinatal outcomes encompassing perinatal mortality and specified neonatal morbidities (box).

Six models showed favourable effects on primary outcome measures (e.g., standardized measures of child development outcomes and reduction in behaviour problems).13 Only studies with outcomes using direct observation, direct assessment, or administrative records were included.

Nationally, any amount of breastfeeding is used as a definition of breastfeeding to assess breastfeeding rates.2, 3 In keeping with this definition, we described breastfeeding as receiving any breast milk at 12 weeks as our primary outcome measure.

Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were rates of exclusive breast feeding at discharge from hospital and two weeks, six weeks, three months, and six months after delivery.

We included 8 primary outcome measures.

Main outcome measures were Bayley's Scales of Infant Development at age 13 months (Mental Index, MDI; Psychomotor Index, PDI), Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scales of Intelligence (WPPSI - R), and Peabody Developmental Scales at age 5.

Primary outcome: «any breastfeeding» duration, as measured by the age in days at complete breastfeeding cessation

Primary outcomes included physician - reported side effects measured via a modified RTOG scale and patient - reported outcomes of urinary, bowel and sexual function side effects measured with the Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) questionnaire.

Frequency of elbow pain during activity was the primary outcomes measure for each group.

The study's primary outcomes measure was the rate of exacerbation, defined as the number of exacerbation events per participant year.

Averaged over a four - year follow - up period, operatively treated patients at least 80 years of age, had significantly greater improvement in all primary and secondary outcome measures compared with patients at least 80 years of age who received nonsurgical treatment.

The primary outcome was aortic inflammation, as measured by 18 - FDG - PET / CT scans — an imaging technique that reveals inflammation in the aorta.

The study is investigator led and has therefore focused on clinical need, targeting patients with progressive multiple sclerosis in whom most disability is incurred... The study also reports a predominant effect on neurodegenerative rather than inflammatory outcomes, suggesting a novel mechanism of action that might be suitable as combination treatment with immunomodulatory treatments... Further phase 3 studies to measure the effect of simvastatin on sustained disability, particularly in patients with non-relapsing secondary progressive and primary progressive multiple sclerosis, are clearly needed, but this trial represents a promising point from which to develop trials of progressive disease.»

The primary outcome measured for the study was cognitive deterioration among patients who completed assessments at study entry and 3 months.

The primary outcome measure was the Alcohol Urge Questionnaire that was taken at pre-test and 20 minutes later at post-test.

Studies have consistently shown that providing the primary care physician with a team - based infrastructure of specialized, non-physician caregivers whose role is to provide a continuous framework of monitoring and management, improves adherence to quality measures and yields superior outcomes, cost, and patient satisfaction.

The primary outcome measures were graft integrity, subjective knee stability and functional status.

Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was conversion to open laparotomy.

Primary outcome was assessed by changes to liver fat measured by MRI - PDFF, conducted by the Liver Imaging Group in the Department of Radiology at UC San Diego Health.

The primary outcome measure will be safety, ensuring the cells graft properly and do not result in any tumorous growth.

The primary outcome was safety, measured as 1) occurrence of solicited symptoms during a 7 - day follow - up period after immunization (day of immunization and days 1, 2, 3 and 7 after immunization); 2) occurrence of unsolicited symptoms during a 30 - day follow - up period after each immunization (day of immunization and 29 subsequent days); and 3) occurrence of serious adverse events (SAE) during the study period.

The primary outcome was changes in depression scores measured by the HRSD, and these researchers considered, a priori, the mean difference of 3.5 points to be a clinically important treatment effect.

Since we are only looking for an increase in progranulin, a one - tailed analysis could have been considered appropriate, and would further increase power, but we opted for the more conservative approach, since we are essentially 100 % powered for all the primary outcome measures (Figs. 3 and 4) even with the two - tailed analysis.

They suggest that age at onset of ambulation could be a primary outcome measure in clinical trials involving treatment in early infancy.

We set out to test whether, compared with placebo, supplementation would increase fat - free mass (FFM) 10 (primary outcome) while improving strength, nutritional status, inflammation, and measures of quality of life and physical function (secondary outcomes).

Kate Copping - Westgarth Primary School, Victoria Using Data to Develop Collaborative Practice and Improve Student Learning Outcomes Dr Bronte Nicholls and Jason Loke, Australian Science and Mathematics School, South Australia Using New Technology for Classroom Assessment: An iPad app to measure learning in dance education Sue Mullane - Sunshine Special Developmental School, Victoria Dr Kim Dunphy - Making Dance Matter, Victoria Effective Differentiation: Changing outcomes in a multi-campus school Yvonne Reilly and Jodie Parsons - Sunshine College, Victoria Improving Numeracy Outcomes: Findings from an intervention program Michaela Epstein - Chaffey Secondary College, Victoria Workshop: Developing Rubrics and Guttman Charts to Target All Students» Zones of Proximal Development Holly Bishop - Westgarth Primary School, Victoria Bree Bishop - Carwatha College P - 12, Victoria Raising the Bar: School Improvement in action Beth Gilligan, Selina Kinne, Andrew Pritchard, Kate Longey and Fred O'Leary - Dominic College, Tasmania Teacher Feedback: Creating a positive culture for reform Peta Ranieri - John Wollaston Anglican Community School, Western AOutcomes Dr Bronte Nicholls and Jason Loke, Australian Science and Mathematics School, South Australia Using New Technology for Classroom Assessment: An iPad app to measure learning in dance education Sue Mullane - Sunshine Special Developmental School, Victoria Dr Kim Dunphy - Making Dance Matter, Victoria Effective Differentiation: Changing outcomes in a multi-campus school Yvonne Reilly and Jodie Parsons - Sunshine College, Victoria Improving Numeracy Outcomes: Findings from an intervention program Michaela Epstein - Chaffey Secondary College, Victoria Workshop: Developing Rubrics and Guttman Charts to Target All Students» Zones of Proximal Development Holly Bishop - Westgarth Primary School, Victoria Bree Bishop - Carwatha College P - 12, Victoria Raising the Bar: School Improvement in action Beth Gilligan, Selina Kinne, Andrew Pritchard, Kate Longey and Fred O'Leary - Dominic College, Tasmania Teacher Feedback: Creating a positive culture for reform Peta Ranieri - John Wollaston Anglican Community School, Western Aoutcomes in a multi-campus school Yvonne Reilly and Jodie Parsons - Sunshine College, Victoria Improving Numeracy Outcomes: Findings from an intervention program Michaela Epstein - Chaffey Secondary College, Victoria Workshop: Developing Rubrics and Guttman Charts to Target All Students» Zones of Proximal Development Holly Bishop - Westgarth Primary School, Victoria Bree Bishop - Carwatha College P - 12, Victoria Raising the Bar: School Improvement in action Beth Gilligan, Selina Kinne, Andrew Pritchard, Kate Longey and Fred O'Leary - Dominic College, Tasmania Teacher Feedback: Creating a positive culture for reform Peta Ranieri - John Wollaston Anglican Community School, Western AOutcomes: Findings from an intervention program Michaela Epstein - Chaffey Secondary College, Victoria Workshop: Developing Rubrics and Guttman Charts to Target All Students» Zones of Proximal Development Holly Bishop - Westgarth Primary School, Victoria Bree Bishop - Carwatha College P - 12, Victoria Raising the Bar: School Improvement in action Beth Gilligan, Selina Kinne, Andrew Pritchard, Kate Longey and Fred O'Leary - Dominic College, Tasmania Teacher Feedback: Creating a positive culture for reform Peta Ranieri - John Wollaston Anglican Community School, Western Australia

An inspection involves an assessment of a school's performance on academic and other measured outcomes, followed by an onsite visit to the school, typically lasting one or two days for primary schools.

Our primary outcome variable is student achievement as measured by performance on standardized tests.

Our primary outcome measures will include teachers» classroom performance as captured by the MQI, students» perceptions of their teachers» effectiveness, and student test scores.

The primary aims of this study are to document the process of moving towards new, integrated systems in each of these cities; to highlight which strategies moved the cities forward in creating these systems and what barriers the cities encountered; to examine how these cities incorporated the needs of students with disabilities, English language learners, and students from different economic backgrounds into their system designs; to understand how students, teachers, and parents, and others experience elements of the new system and how these experiences differed for students with special needs; and to document quantitative outcomes on a range of measures, disaggregated by student subgroup.

The report - Progress matters in primary too - says: «This report shows that it is the progress measure to be the one that will drive performance while aligning better with the government's two core goals of securing the best outcomes for all, not just some, pupils and closing the gap between pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds and the rest.

The primary outcome measure for the study was the Test of Early Mathematics Ability — Third Edition (TEMA — 3), a broad measure of student proficiency in mathematics.

For the measures with wider deviations, many factors contribute to differences between the AEO Reference case projections and realized outcomes, but two primary contributors are the initial projections of future oil prices and overall economic activity that are used in NEMS.5 These projections can greatly influence the other projections made by the model, which is why each recent AEO includes alternative cases exploring differences in economic growth (Low and High Economic Growth cases) and in oil prices (Low and High Oil Price cases).

The study questionnaire was developed using previously tested questions and was pretested on a small sample of women from the study sites to assess clarity of the questions and time required to administer the questionnaire.4, 15 The primary outcome measure was pregnancy, determined by positive urine pregnancy test at follow - up, self - report over the study period, or positive test on medical chart review.

The change in the number of days suspended between the period 4 months before intervention and the 4 months during the intervention period was the primary outcome measure.

Primary outcome measures were changes in absenteeism, school rule infractions and suspension days during the four - month pretest period prior to randomization compared with the four - month intervention period.

Outcome measures refer to the 12 major outcomes that were selected as the primary indicators of child well - being for Missouri KIDS COUNT.

Main Outcome Measures Primary outcomes were use of EC, pregnancies, and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) assessed at 6 months; secondary outcomes were changes in contraceptive and condom use and sexual behavior.

A comparison of a Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) against two established satisfaction scales as an outcome measure of primary care consultations

Primary outcomes measured during the trial period to child - age 2 years were:

In a recent randomised controlled trial (RCT), 32 we showed that an intervention in the form of a culturally tailored parenting support programme was effective in reducing children's behaviour problems 2 months after the intervention, which was our primary outcome measure of the study.

Given the primary objectives of the trial and measures collected in existing RCTs, 18, 49 we chose to anchor our sample size calculation around detection of a minimum effect size of 0.3 for the responsivity subscale of the Home Observation Measurement of the Environment (HOME) Inventory (see table 2), to allow comparisons with the original MECSH trial and other international SNHV programmes.60 The sample size applies across all of the subscales of the HOME Inventory and other continuous outcomes as based on number of SDs rather than the actual outcome distributions.