ELIZA cgi-bash version rev. 1.90
- Medical English LInking keywords finder for the PubMed Zipped Archive (ELIZA) -

return Multiple keyword search for study aim children. [cache] ELIZA shows 93 instances during recent 5 years.
Giving ELIZA another keyword in the link would narrow down further.
Show all, Jump to: 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 END
67) PMID: 31941385 DOI: 10.1080/10641963.2020.1714642
% 2020 Clinical and experimental hypertension (New York, N.Y. : 1993)
* Comparison of cuff-based and cuffless continuous blood pressure measurements in children and adolescents.
- Objective: In recent times, new methods of blood pressure measurements have been introduced, including cuffless blood pressure (BP) measurement device using pulse transit time (PTT) for calculation of BP values. However, it is still unknown how values obtained with a new cuffless device compare with standard ambulatory measurements in children. The main aim of the study was to investigate whether BP values measured by a cuffless PTT device are comparable with measurements by a standard upper arm cuff-based BP device.Methods: Thirty children were prospectively included. Blood pressure measurements using the cuffless device (Somnotouch-NIBP) and cuff-based standard device (Omron 907) were performed simultaneously on the left and right arm.Results: Mean systolic BP of the standard measurements was 123,47 ± 14,91 mmHg and 127,48 ± 15,98 mmHg (p < .001) measured by cuffless method. Mean diastolic BP of the standard ABPM measurements was 66,88 ± 11,86 mmHg and 68,52 ± 12,36 mmHg (p < .001). There were significant positive correlations between standard and cuffless measurements.Conclusion: The results show that the created PWV-BP function produces a significant correlation between BP derived from the PWV and the SBP measured by sphygmomanometry. When applying this device in clinical practice, one may keep in mind that the reported mean values over 24 hours, awake and asleep time are not directly interchangeable with cuff-based standard 24-hour BP values. The measured BP values were higher by the new technique. Although differences in SBP between both methods reached values up to 20 mmHg, we think that the development of a cuffless BP monitoring system will provide novel solutions in various medical situations.

68) PMID: 31941689 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01611-19
% 2020 Journal of clinical microbiology
* Comparison of the ID NOWTM Influenza A & B 2, Cobas® Influenza A/B, and Xpert® Xpress Flu Point-of-Care Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for Influenza A/B Detection in Children.
- Early diagnosis of influenza (Flu) virus is critical for patient management and infection control. The ID NOW™ Influenza A & B 2 assay (ID-NOW™; Abbott Laboratories), Cobas® Influenza A/B nucleic acid test (LIAT; Roche Molecular Systems Inc.), and Xpert® Xpress Flu (Xpert; Cepheid) are rapid, point-of-care molecular assays for Flu detection. The study aim was to compare the performance of these three commercially available Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) waived Flu assays. We prospectively enrolled 201 children <18 years old from January to April 2018 and collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens in viral media. Aliquots were frozen for testing on different diagnostic platforms per manufacturer's instructions. CDC Flu A/B PCR was used as a reference method to evaluate the performance of these three platforms. Among the 201 specimens tested, the CDC Flu A/B PCR assay detected Flu A/B in 107 samples (Flu A: 73, Flu B: 36; Dual Flu A/B positive: 2), while ID-NOW™ detected 102 samples (Flu A: 69, Flu B: 37; Dual Flu A/B positive: 4; Invalid rate: 1/201-0.5%), LIAT assay detected 112 samples (Flu A: 74, Flu B: 38; Invalid rate: 11/201-5.5%), and Xpert detected 112 samples (Flu A: 76, Flu B: 36; Invalid rate: 6/201-3.0%). The overall sensitivities for ID-NOW™/LIAT/Xpert for Flu A detection (93.2%/100%/100%) and Flu B detection (97.2%/94.4%/91.7%) were comparable. Specificity for Flu A and B detection by all methods was >97%. These molecular assays had higher sensitivity when compared to a historical standard-of-care test result from the BD Veritor™ antigen test (Flu A: 79.5%; Flu B: 66.7%).

Show all, Jump to: 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 END