Sentence examples for used severity of from inspiring English sources

During the first four years of life, developmental scores in 10 children ranged from above average development to severe developmental delay; they were influenced by the type of intelligence test used, severity of motor problems, speech/language difficulties and age at start of therapy.

The MSM incorporates three main factors: treatment (i.e. number of antidepressant treatment failures and whether augmentation or electroconvulsive therapy had been used), severity of symptoms, and duration of presenting episode.

NEMS correlates highly with all currently used severity of illness scoring systems such as Acute Physiology, Age, Chronic Health Evaluation III, SAPS-II, and SOFA-II (16, 20 ).

In 1985, the original model was revised and simplified to create APACHE II [ 4], now the world's most widely used severity of illness score.

Among the most commonly used severity of illness scoring systems in intensive care are the APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II) and the SAPS II (simplified acute physiology score II) [ 11- 13].

However, the studies had substantial heterogeneity (I = 96%, 95% CI = 94 99) and none of the subgroups investigated like population, admission category, assay used, severity of disease, and description and masking of the reference standard, could account for that heterogeneity.

The three most used severity-of-illness scores are the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) [2], the Mortality Probability Models (MPM0-III) [3] and the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS 3) [4, 5].

Investigators have been using severity-of-illness indexes such as APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation score II) to describe patients with prolonged critical illness.

Further, unlike difficult to use, severity of illness scoring systems which merely score existing injury, fulfillment of renal angina aids prediction of severe AKI.

All the diagnoses in these episodes of care are then coded and grouped with 3 M CRG (Clinical Risk Groups) software to rate their global health status (nine statuses and 27 subgroups using severity of illness).

After adjustment for baseline variables, the HR was 1.666 [1.405; 1.976] and further decreased to indicate no associated risk (HR 1.003 [0.980; 1.027]) when it was adjusted for vasopressor use, severity of disease and transfusions.