Sentences with phrase «rates of some adverse outcomes»

Dr. Fisher believes that dispassionate, rigorous study of birth across all settings is more important than ever given disparities in women's access to trained and licensed care providers, current and future physician workforce issues, rising costs of health care, and unacceptably high rates of adverse outcomes for mothers and infants in the U.S. compared to other industrialized countries.

Regulating it, using better trained practitioners and proper guidelines for risking - out and transfer definitely would reduce the rate of adverse outcomes.

In many previous U.S. studies, it was not possible to disaggregate planned in - hospital births from planned out - of - hospital births that took place in the hospital after a woman's intrapartum transfer to the hospital.3, 9,10 The latter births represent 16.5 % of planned out - of - hospital births in our population, and misclassification of these births as in - hospital births caused rates of adverse outcomes among planned out - of - hospital births to be underestimated (in some cases, substantially).

Did they provide you with the relative rates of adverse outcomes in home vs. hospital?

The rates of some adverse outcomes were too low for us to draw statistical comparisons, and ongoing evaluation of home birth is warranted.

Professor Heal said there was no difference in the rates of adverse outcomes (skin irritation, etc) in either group.

Both one and two year rates of adverse outcomes compared favorably with historical performance criteria established among medically managed patients with aortic stenosis.

Not exact matches

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in such forward - looking statements and that should be considered in evaluating our outlook include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) our ability to continue to grow our business and execute our growth strategy, including the timing, execution, and profitability of new and maturing programs; 2) our ability to perform our obligations under our new and maturing commercial, business aircraft, and military development programs, and the related recurring production; 3) our ability to accurately estimate and manage performance, cost, and revenue under our contracts, including our ability to achieve certain cost reductions with respect to the B787 program; 4) margin pressures and the potential for additional forward losses on new and maturing programs; 5) our ability to accommodate, and the cost of accommodating, announced increases in the build rates of certain aircraft; 6) the effect on aircraft demand and build rates of changing customer preferences for business aircraft, including the effect of global economic conditions on the business aircraft market and expanding conflicts or political unrest in the Middle East or Asia; 7) customer cancellations or deferrals as a result of global economic uncertainty or otherwise; 8) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which we operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates; 9) the success and timely execution of key milestones such as the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals, including our ability to obtain in a timely fashion any required regulatory or other third party approvals for the consummation of our announced acquisition of Asco, and customer adherence to their announced schedules; 10) our ability to successfully negotiate, or re-negotiate, future pricing under our supply agreements with Boeing and our other customers; 11) our ability to enter into profitable supply arrangements with additional customers; 12) the ability of all parties to satisfy their performance requirements under existing supply contracts with our two major customers, Boeing and Airbus, and other customers, and the risk of nonpayment by such customers; 13) any adverse impact on Boeing's and Airbus» production of aircraft resulting from cancellations, deferrals, or reduced orders by their customers or from labor disputes, domestic or international hostilities, or acts of terrorism; 14) any adverse impact on the demand for air travel or our operations from the outbreak of diseases or epidemic or pandemic outbreaks; 15) our ability to avoid or recover from cyber-based or other security attacks, information technology failures, or other disruptions; 16) returns on pension plan assets and the impact of future discount rate changes on pension obligations; 17) our ability to borrow additional funds or refinance debt, including our ability to obtain the debt to finance the purchase price for our announced acquisition of Asco on favorable terms or at all; 18) competition from commercial aerospace original equipment manufacturers and other aerostructures suppliers; 19) the effect of governmental laws, such as U.S. export control laws and U.S. and foreign anti-bribery laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the United Kingdom Bribery Act, and environmental laws and agency regulations, both in the U.S. and abroad; 20) the effect of changes in tax law, such as the effect of The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the «TCJA») that was enacted on December 22, 2017, and changes to the interpretations of or guidance related thereto, and the Company's ability to accurately calculate and estimate the effect of such changes; 21) any reduction in our credit ratings; 22) our dependence on our suppliers, as well as the cost and availability of raw materials and purchased components; 23) our ability to recruit and retain a critical mass of highly - skilled employees and our relationships with the unions representing many of our employees; 24) spending by the U.S. and other governments on defense; 25) the possibility that our cash flows and our credit facility may not be adequate for our additional capital needs or for payment of interest on, and principal of, our indebtedness; 26) our exposure under our revolving credit facility to higher interest payments should interest rates increase substantially; 27) the effectiveness of any interest rate hedging programs; 28) the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting; 29) the outcome or impact of ongoing or future litigation, claims, and regulatory actions; 30) exposure to potential product liability and warranty claims; 31) our ability to effectively assess, manage and integrate acquisitions that we pursue, including our ability to successfully integrate the Asco business and generate synergies and other cost savings; 32) our ability to consummate our announced acquisition of Asco in a timely matter while avoiding any unexpected costs, charges, expenses, adverse changes to business relationships and other business disruptions for ourselves and Asco as a result of the acquisition; 33) our ability to continue selling certain receivables through our supplier financing program; 34) the risks of doing business internationally, including fluctuations in foreign current exchange rates, impositions of tariffs or embargoes, compliance with foreign laws, and domestic and foreign government policies; and 35) our ability to complete the proposed accelerated stock repurchase plan, among other things.

These risks and uncertainties include, among others: the unfavorable outcome of litigation, including so - called «Paragraph IV» litigation and other patent litigation, related to any of our products or products using our proprietary technologies, which may lead to competition from generic drug manufacturers; data from clinical trials may be interpreted by the FDA in different ways than we interpret it; the FDA may not agree with our regulatory approval strategies or components of our filings for our products, including our clinical trial designs, conduct and methodologies and, for ALKS 5461, evidence of efficacy and adequacy of bridging to buprenorphine; clinical development activities may not be completed on time or at all; the results of our clinical development activities may not be positive, or predictive of real - world results or of results in subsequent clinical trials; regulatory submissions may not occur or be submitted in a timely manner; the company and its licensees may not be able to continue to successfully commercialize their products; there may be a reduction in payment rate or reimbursement for the company's products or an increase in the company's financial obligations to governmental payers; the FDA or regulatory authorities outside the U.S. may make adverse decisions regarding the company's products; the company's products may prove difficult to manufacture, be precluded from commercialization by the proprietary rights of third parties, or have unintended side effects, adverse reactions or incidents of misuse; and those risks and uncertainties described under the heading «Risk Factors» in the company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10 - K and in subsequent filings made by the company with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission («SEC»), which are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov.

For healthy nulliparous women with a low risk pregnancy, the risk of an adverse perinatal outcome seems to be higher for planned births at home, and the intrapartum transfer rate is high in all settings other than an obstetric unit

* If * morbidity is lower in the homebirth group because more of those ill women died, and were thus removed from the sample, the apparent rate of «severe adverse maternal» outcomes has been artificially deflated in the homebirth group — by an unknown amount — and therefore is evidence of pretty much nothing.

«Women with planned home birth had lower rates of all adverse maternal outcomes, albeit not significantly so for nulliparous women.»

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.

This was a systematic review of cohort and case - control studies that compared rates of any adverse pregnancy outcome (such as miscarriages, preterm delivery, intrauterine growth restriction, major congenital malformations and long - term developmental outcomes) between women who experienced NVP and women who did not.

Regional variations in practice significantly affect rates of interventions, near misses, and adverse outcomes.

A 2014 study that examines nearly 17,000 courses of midwife - led care confirms that among low - risk women, home births result in low rates of interventions without an increase in adverse outcomes for babies and mothers alike.

The study reviewed the births of nearly 17,000 women and found that, among low - risk women, planned home births result in low rates of birth interventions without an increase in adverse outcomes for mothers and newborns.

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 analyses.

Labor induction has been increasing since the early 1990s, 1 and the rate is running at about 20 % for pregnancies at term.2, 3 Induction of labor compared with spontaneous labor is associated with adverse maternal outcomes, including at least a doubling in the caesarean delivery rate, 4,5 25 — 50 % increase in instrumental vaginal delivery rate, 3,5 higher postpartum hemorrhage rate, 5 and prolonged labor.5 Neonates born after induced labor are more likely to have low Apgar score and low umbilical cord blood pH. 5

«Planned home births result in low rates of interventions without an increase in adverse outcomes for mothers and babies,» Simkins boasts.

Countries that have the highest rates of midwifery care have the lowest rates of complications and adverse outcomes.

These findings follow earlier research by Janssen that demonstrated that planned home births resulted in fewer interventions and similar rates of adverse newborn outcomes compared to planned hospital births among women who met the criteria for home births.

Low - risk women in this cohort experienced high rates of physiologic birth and low rates of intervention without an increase in adverse outcomes.»

In today's peer - reviewed Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health (JMWH), a landmark study confirms that among low - risk women, planned home births result in low rates of interventions without an increase in adverse outcomes for mothers and babies.

They go on to say «Low - risk women in this cohort experienced high rates of physiologic birth and low rates of intervention without an increase in adverse outcomes» which is a lie.

«among low - risk women, planned home births result in low rates of interventions without an increase in adverse outcomes for mothers and babies.»

When we restricted the home - birth group to women who actually gave birth at home, the rates of adverse maternal and newborn outcomes did not differ significantly from those among all planned home births.

Our study showed that planned home birth attended by a registered midwife was associated with very low and comparable rates of perinatal death and reduced rates of obstetric interventions and adverse maternal outcomes compared with planned hospital birth attended by a midwife or physician.

«Our research indicates that insertion of cervical pessary at around 22 weeks in both randomly selected women pregnant with twins and in patients with a short cervix of less than 25 millimeters does not reduce the rate of spontaneous early preterm birth, perinatal death, adverse neonatal outcome, or need for neonatal therapy.»

He points out that babies still die or are damaged because of intrapartum hypoxia and that focusing entirely on the fetal heart rate without taking account of other relevant risk factors «may create a lack of situational awareness and lead to adverse outcomes.»

The study found that the higher the number of group visits attended, the lower the rates of adverse birth outcomes.

«The results suggest that the environment is a stronger contributor to adverse birth outcomes than genes, since there are differences in rates of birth outcomes across states» Thayer said.

«Although signs suggest that obstetric interventions are being used too readily in developed countries, the lower rates we saw among First Nations mothers are of concern when coupled with the known increased risk of adverse perinatal and infant outcomes,» writes Corinne Riddell, PhD candidate, Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, with coauthors.

Overall, «the absolute rates of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes are low» — regardless of whether a woman who has had a prior C - section undergoes vaginal delivery or has a repeat C - section, noted study author Dr. Carmen Young, of the University of Alberta.

«Abnormalities in thyroid function can have an adverse effect on reproductive health and result in reduced rates of conception, increased miscarriage risk and adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes,» said study co-author Amanda Jefferys in a journal news release.

If one accepts the conclusions of the enormous body of literature that finds no difference in perinatal mortality rates or other adverse outcomes between planned, midwife - attended home births and hospital births, then the pursuit of this line of reasoning is a non-starter.

An important study shows that home birth for low risk women reduces the rate of interventions without increasing adverse outcomes.

several high - quality Canadian studies confirming no difference in the rates of perinatal death between planned home and hospital birth with much lower rates of both interventions and adverse outcomes (19 - 21);

The authors of the report tie high suspension rates to other adverse outcomes, including low graduation rates and involvement with the juvenile justice system.

Such statements reflect the current views of Barnes & Noble with respect to future events, the outcome of which is subject to certain risks, including, among others, the general economic environment and consumer spending patterns, decreased consumer demand for Barnes & Noble's products, low growth or declining sales and net income due to various factors, possible disruptions in Barnes & Noble's computer systems, telephone systems or supply chain, possible risks associated with data privacy, information security and intellectual property, possible work stoppages or increases in labor costs, possible increases in shipping rates or interruptions in shipping service, effects of competition, possible risks that inventory in channels of distribution may be larger than able to be sold, possible risks associated with changes in the strategic direction of the device business, including possible reduction in sales of content, accessories and other merchandise and other adverse financial impacts, possible risk that component parts will be rendered obsolete or otherwise not be able to be effectively utilized in devices to be sold, possible risk that financial and operational forecasts and projections are not achieved, possible risk that returns from consumers or channels of distribution may be greater than estimated, the risk that digital sales growth is less than expectations and the risk that it does not exceed the rate of investment spend, higher - than - anticipated store closing or relocation costs, higher interest rates, the performance of Barnes & Noble's online, digital and other initiatives, the success of Barnes & Noble's strategic investments, unanticipated increases in merchandise, component or occupancy costs, unanticipated adverse litigation results or effects, product and component shortages, the potential adverse impact on the Company's businesses resulting from the Company's prior reviews of strategic alternatives and the potential separation of the Company's businesses, the risk that the transactions with Microsoft and Pearson do not achieve the expected benefits for the parties or impose costs on the Company in excess of what the Company anticipates, including the risk that NOOK Media's applications are not commercially successful or that the expected distribution of those applications is not achieved, risks associated with the international expansion contemplated by the relationship with Microsoft, including that it is not successful or is delayed, the risk that NOOK Media is not able to perform its obligations under the Microsoft and Pearson commercial agreements and the consequences thereof, risks associated with the restatement contained in, the delayed filing of, and the material weakness in internal controls described in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 27, 2013, risks associated with the SEC investigation disclosed in the quarterly report on Form 10 - Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 26, 2013, risks associated with the ongoing efforts to rationalize the NOOK business and the expected costs and benefits of such efforts and associated risks and other factors which may be outside of Barnes & Noble's control, including those factors discussed in detail in Item 1A, «Risk Factors,» in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 27, 2013, and in Barnes & Noble's other filings made hereafter from time to time with the SEC.

Such statements reflect the current views of Barnes & Noble with respect to future events, the outcome of which is subject to certain risks, including, among others, the effect of the proposed separation of NOOK Media, the general economic environment and consumer spending patterns, decreased consumer demand for Barnes & Noble's products, low growth or declining sales and net income due to various factors, possible disruptions in Barnes & Noble's computer systems, telephone systems or supply chain, possible risks associated with data privacy, information security and intellectual property, possible work stoppages or increases in labor costs, possible increases in shipping rates or interruptions in shipping service, effects of competition, possible risks that inventory in channels of distribution may be larger than able to be sold, possible risks associated with changes in the strategic direction of the device business, including possible reduction in sales of content, accessories and other merchandise and other adverse financial impacts, possible risk that component parts will be rendered obsolete or otherwise not be able to be effectively utilized in devices to be sold, possible risk that financial and operational forecasts and projections are not achieved, possible risk that returns from consumers or channels of distribution may be greater than estimated, the risk that digital sales growth is less than expectations and the risk that it does not exceed the rate of investment spend, higher - than - anticipated store closing or relocation costs, higher interest rates, the performance of Barnes & Noble's online, digital and other initiatives, the success of Barnes & Noble's strategic investments, unanticipated increases in merchandise, component or occupancy costs, unanticipated adverse litigation results or effects, product and component shortages, risks associated with the commercial agreement with Samsung, the potential adverse impact on the Company's businesses resulting from the Company's prior reviews of strategic alternatives and the potential separation of the Company's businesses (including with respect to the timing of the completion thereof), the risk that the transactions with Pearson and Samsung do not achieve the expected benefits for the parties or impose costs on the Company in excess of what the Company anticipates, including the risk that NOOK Media's applications are not commercially successful or that the expected distribution of those applications is not achieved, risks associated with the international expansion previously undertaken, including any risks associated with a reduction of international operations following termination of the Microsoft commercial agreement, the risk that NOOK Media is not able to perform its obligations under the Pearson and Samsung commercial agreements and the consequences thereof, the risks associated with the termination of Microsoft commercial agreement, including potential customer losses, risks associated with the restatement contained in, the delayed filing of, and the material weakness in internal controls described in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 27, 2013, risks associated with the SEC investigation disclosed in the quarterly report on Form 10 - Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 26, 2013, risks associated with the ongoing efforts to rationalize the NOOK business and the expected costs and benefits of such efforts and associated risks and other factors which may be outside of Barnes & Noble's control, including those factors discussed in detail in Item 1A, «Risk Factors,» in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended May 3, 2014, and in Barnes & Noble's other filings made hereafter from time to time with the SEC.

Such statements reflect the current views of Barnes & Noble with respect to future events, the outcome of which is subject to certain risks, including, among others, the general economic environment and consumer spending patterns, decreased consumer demand for Barnes & Noble's products, low growth or declining sales and net income due to various factors, including store closings, higher - than - anticipated or increasing costs, including with respect to store closings, relocation, occupancy (including in connection with lease renewals) and labor costs, the effects of competition, the risk of insufficient access to financing to implement future business initiatives, risks associated with data privacy and information security, risks associated with Barnes & Noble's supply chain, including possible delays and disruptions and increases in shipping rates, various risks associated with the digital business, including the possible loss of customers, declines in digital content sales, risks and costs associated with ongoing efforts to rationalize the digital business and the digital business not being able to perform its obligations under the Samsung commercial agreement and the consequences thereof, the risk that financial and operational forecasts and projections are not achieved, the performance of Barnes & Noble's initiatives including but not limited to its new store concept and e-commerce initiatives, unanticipated adverse litigation results or effects, potential infringement of Barnes & Noble's intellectual property by third parties or by Barnes & Noble of the intellectual property of third parties, and other factors, including those factors discussed in detail in Item 1A, «Risk Factors,» in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2016, and in Barnes & Noble's other filings made hereafter from time to time with the SEC.

Kennedys partner Mark Burton said: «The enormous increase in claims costs caused by the new rate risks a number of adverse outcomes.

The best chance of getting a good underwriting outcome will occur when lung cancer was diagnosed at an early stage, like In Situ or Stage I. (Note, it is probable you will receive an adverse rating if you apply too soon after completing cancer treatment.

If your car is old for a considerable amount of period it will not automatically command a lower rate but it may have an adverse effect on the outcome of the price.

Attention - deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most common childhood neurodevelopmental disorder.1, 2 Important questions about adult outcomes for childhood ADHD remain, including the rate of persistence of ADHD into adulthood, the psychiatric comorbidities of adult ADHD, and the risk of serious adverse outcomes, such as criminality and mortality.

Perinatal depression is common; in high - income countries the point prevalence is approximately 13 %, with higher rates estimated in low - income and middle - income countries.1 Furthermore, perinatal depression is associated with an increased risk of adverse child outcomes, including behavioural, emotional and cognitive difficulties, 2 which persist into late childhood and adolescence.

On social - emotional measures, foster children in the NSCAW study tended to have more compromised functioning than would be expected from a high - risk sample.43 Moreover, as indicated in the previous section, research suggests that foster children are more likely than nonfoster care children to have insecure or disordered attachments, and the adverse long - term outcomes associated with such attachments.44 Many studies of foster children postulate that a majority have mental health difficulties.45 They have higher rates of depression, poorer social skills, lower adaptive functioning, and more externalizing behavioral problems, such as aggression and impulsivity.46 Additionally, research has documented high levels of mental health service utilization among foster children47 due to both greater mental health needs and greater access to services.

Rates of preterm birth, low birth weight, and other adverse birth outcomes in the US are higher than in most other developed countries.