The phrase "an elevated hazard" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe a situation or condition that poses a higher than normal level of risk or danger.
Example: "The construction site has been deemed an elevated hazard due to the presence of heavy machinery and unstable structures."
Alternatives: "a heightened risk" or "an increased danger."
The primary retrospective analysis, combining ages and sexes, showed an elevated hazard of hypercholesterolemia for exposure quintiles 2 5 relative to quintile 1.
Our analysis among subgroups with left main disease showed an elevated hazard of the combined endpoint for left dominance that was statistically significant while a stenosis in the left main did not predict events in right dominance.
Subgroup analysis in patients with left main disease revealed an elevated hazard of the combined endpoint for left dominance (HR 6.45, 95% CI 1.66 25.0, P = 0.007), but not for right dominance.
Age appeared to have a nonlinear association with noncontinuation, where individuals aged 19 29, 30 39, and 40 49 years all had an elevated hazard compared with individuals aged 0 18 years, while older adults aged 50 59 and ≥60 years did not.
An elevated hazard rate for developing diabetes with doubling of ACR disappeared after adjustment for covariates.
For the first 15 operations after a stem or cup type was introduced, there was an elevated risk of revision (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.3, 95% CI: 1.1 1.5).
To our knowledge there is no established instrument for target groups with an elevated risk for developmental hazards (such as AIA), that assesses a broad array of familial RPF.
It would be beneficial if the implementation of this tool could be tested in other subpopulations with an elevated risk for developmental hazards, for example, adolescents in residential or non-residential youth care services.
Interarm differences of ≥10 mmHg were associated with an elevated risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, HR, 1.49, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.04 2.14) and CVD mortality (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.01 3.69).
A cut-off value of 7 dB in this area had a sensitivity of 87.5% and a specificity of 100%, indicating that patients with sensitivity less than 7 dB in this area had an elevated risk of collision with the hazard in this scenario.
It was reasonable to worry that fenofibrate was more likely to be prescribed to individuals with a high risk for diabetes or unrecorded diabetes, creating a falsely elevated hazard for development of diabetes during fenofibrate treatment compared with bezafibrate treatment.
