Sentence examples for lower mortality hazard from inspiring English sources

We have previously reported that HIMS participants have lower mortality hazard than men who were invited but chose not to participate, and men in the general population who were not invited [22].

Tick control was associated with a 49% lower mortality hazard compared to farms that did not control for ticks.

Patients who received an ICD had an adjusted 44% lower mortality (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence intervals 0.32 1.01; P = 0.053) than comparable patients without ICD therapy.

In a Cox regression analysis, adjusted for propensity scores and other potential confounding factors, ASP adherence was independently associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.14 0.92).

An examination of the mortality experience of the Ely cohort [ 6] suggested that individuals who were invited to diabetes screening had a non-significant 21% lower mortality (hazard ratio 0.79; 95% CI 0.63 1.00, P = 0.05) than individuals who were not invited to screening between 1990 and 1999.

Those receiving nafcillin or cefazolin had 79% lower mortality hazards compared with those who received vancomycin alone (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.09, 0.47).

Among the 122 patients who initially received vancomycin empirically, those who were switched to nafcillin or cefazolin (66/122) had 69% lower mortality hazards (adjusted HR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.10, 0.95) compared to those who remained on vancomycin.

Among these older patients, ICD use was associated with a lower mortality risk (hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.93) but not with a significant reduction in risk of sudden cardiac death (0.74, 0.52 to 1.04; fig 5, table 4).

Conscientiousness and career success each predicted lower mortality risk (N = 693, relative hazard (rh) = 0.82 [95% confidence interval = 0.74, 0.91] and rh = 0.80 [0.91] 0.91], respectively), with both shared and unique variance.

In the multivariate survival analysis, receipt of R + IV Chemo was associated with significantly lower mortality risk vs. IV Chemo-only (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.73; 95%% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 0.87) and a non-significant mortality risk reduction with R-mono vs. CLB (HR = 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.21-1.05).

However, uncorrected Cox proportional hazard analysis, censoring patients at last follow-up, suggested a lower mortality risk for patients reaching target.