<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="http://www.feuxdelamour.com/v4/skins/common/feed.css?303"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="fr">
		<id>http://www.feuxdelamour.com/v4/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Rumoured_Ballyhoo_Concerning_Dasatinib</id>
		<title>Rumoured Ballyhoo Concerning Dasatinib - Historique des versions</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.feuxdelamour.com/v4/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Rumoured_Ballyhoo_Concerning_Dasatinib"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.feuxdelamour.com/v4/index.php?title=Rumoured_Ballyhoo_Concerning_Dasatinib&amp;action=history"/>
		<updated>2026-04-19T01:16:44Z</updated>
		<subtitle>Historique pour cette page sur le wiki</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.20alpha</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>http://www.feuxdelamour.com/v4/index.php?title=Rumoured_Ballyhoo_Concerning_Dasatinib&amp;diff=95823&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Cloth59butter : Page créée avec « They found that functional outcome, as measured by the FOSQ, for patients in the home testing group was not clinically inferior to usual laboratory-based testing when usin... »</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.feuxdelamour.com/v4/index.php?title=Rumoured_Ballyhoo_Concerning_Dasatinib&amp;diff=95823&amp;oldid=prev"/>
				<updated>2017-04-30T16:20:17Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Page créée avec « They found that functional outcome, as measured by the FOSQ, for patients in the home testing group was not clinically inferior to usual laboratory-based testing when usin... »&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Nouvelle page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;They found that functional outcome, as measured by the FOSQ, for patients in the home testing group was not clinically inferior to usual laboratory-based testing when using an a priori non-inferiority margin of ?1.0 for the difference in mean change in FOSQ score at 3 months (home mean change of 1.74 vs laboratory mean change of 1.85, adjusted difference 0.0, [http://www.selleckchem.com/products/Dasatinib.html Dasatinib ic50] lower bound of one-sided 95% confidence interval ?0.54). They found that CPAP adherence in the home testing group was also not inferior to the laboratory-based testing group, with mean?��?standard deviation daily use of 3.5?��?2.5?h versus 2.9?��?2.3?h, respectively, using an a priori non-inferiority margin of ?0.75?h (adjusted difference 0.55, lower bound of one-sided 95% confidence interval 0.03). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences in the change in ESS score, psychomotor vigilance, health outcomes as measured by the short form-12 health survey or depression scale scores between the two groups. More recently, Rosen et?al. conducted a multisite, randomized study comparing home-based, unattended, level [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygenase Oxygenase] 3 monitoring and autotitrating CPAP with in-laboratory PSG and CPAP titration for a total of 3 months of follow up.[69] Participants randomized had a high pretest probability of moderate-to-severe OSA, identified by a clinical algorithm (i.e. ��adjusted neck circumference�� ��?43?cm) and ESS ��12, [http://www.selleckchem.com/products/Gefitinib.html Gefitinib order] and were eligible to continue in the study if found by portable monitoring or laboratory PSG to have an AHI ��15/h. Patients in the home-based arm who were found on portable monitoring to have an AHI&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Cloth59butter</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>