Vertaling van "the risk " (Frans → Nederlands) :

TERMINOLOGIE

thé au lait sucré
thee met melk en suiker

brûlure due au contact avec du thé chaud
verbranding als gevolg van contact met hete thee

thé vert
groene thee

thé
thee

thé noir
zwarte thee

thé au lait
thee met melk

thé noir sucré
zwarte thee met suiker

IN-CONTEXT TRANSLATIONS

In the reviews of CEA, it is shown that the posterior risk tends to be more constant, not the relative risk (the posterior risk divided by the prior risk) (see figure 4 in cited reference) 23 .
In the reviews of CEA, it is shown that the posterior risk tends to be more constant, not the relative risk (the posterior risk divided by the prior risk) (see figure 4 in cited reference)23.

¤ chaque fois, les termes de recherche suivants ont été utilisés : [risk stratification pregnancy], [low risk pregnancy], [high risk pregnancy], ou [risicostratificatie zwangerschap], [laagrisicozwangerschap], [hoogrisicozwangerschap] pour les sites néerlandophones.
Telkens werden de volgende zoektermen gehanteerd: [risk stratification pregnancy], [low risk pregnancy], [high risk pregnancy], of [risicostratificatie zwangerschap], [laagrisicozwangerschap], [hoogrisicozwangerschap] in geval van Nederlandstalige sites.

7, 8 Figure 2 shows the danger of combined risk factors, as these tend to interact: all three for stroke important risk factors give you the stroke risk of a person that is not less than 32 years older.
1A).7, 8 shows the danger of combined risk factors, as these tend to interact: all three for stroke important risk factors give you the stroke risk of a person that is not less than 32 years older.

This release contains forward-looking information that involves substantial risks and uncertainties regarding Prevenar 13, including its potential benefits; and the success of the AMC project for vaccines. Such risks and uncertainties include, among other things, the uncertainties inherent in research and development; whether and when regulatory authorities in countries where regulatory applications for Prevenar 13 may be pending or may be submitted will approve such applications and their decisions regarding labeling and other matters that could affect its availability or commercial potential; and competitive developments. A further description of risks and uncertainties can be found in Pfizer’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, and in its reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K.
Such risks and uncertainties include, among other things, the uncertainties inherent in research and development; whether and when regulatory authorities in countries where regulatory applications for Prevenar 13 may be pending or may be submitted will approve such applications and their decisions regarding labeling and other matters that could affect its availability or commercial potential; and competitive developments.

Actual results could differ materially from those currently anticipated due to a number of risks and uncertainties. Risks and uncertainties related to the acquisition of King by Pfizer that could cause results to differ from expectations include: uncertainties as to the timing of the merger; the possibility that a governmental entity may prohibit or delay the consummation of the merger; and the risk of shareholder litigation, including the disposition of currently pending litigation, in connection with the merger.
Actual results could differ materially from those currently anticipated due to a number of risks and uncertainties.

ROC area (SE) Derivation cohort Validation cohort Original Cardiac risk index 5 0,606 (0,034) 0,701 (0,043) Modified Cardiac risk index 6 0,545 (0,022) 0,582 (0,034) ASA class 25 0,697 (0,031) 0,706 (0,036) Revised Cardiac Risk Index 4 0,759 (0,032) 0,806 (0,034) Comparison of performance Original vs Modified p < 0,05 ------
ROC area (SE) Derivation cohort Validation cohort Original Cardiac risk index 5 0,606 (0,034) 0,701 (0,043) Modified Cardiac risk index 6 0,545 (0,022) 0,582 (0,034) ASA class 26 0,697 (0,031) 0,706 (0,036) Revised Cardiac Risk Index 4 0,759 (0,032) 0,806 (0,034) Comparison of performance Original vs Modified p < 0,05 ------

Parmi les nombreux outils développés ces dernières années, le Revised Cardiac Risk Index 4 a été évalué par une analyse de lÊaire sous la courbe ROC, comme étant lÊindex le plus performant par rapport aux index classiques que sont le Cardiac Risk Index 5 , le Modified Cardiac Risk Index 6 , et la classification ASA.
Bij een evaluatie van de Revised Cardiac Risk Index 4 op basis van de area under the curve (AUC) bleek dit de meest performante index in vergelijking met klassieke indexen zoals de Cardiac Risk Index 5 , de Modified Cardiac Risk Index 6 , en de ASA classificatie.

Table 10: Evidence form HTA review : Breast cancer screening among women aged 40 – 49 Relative risks (intention to treat) with confidence reported for each study together with the results of a stepwise meta-analysis and cumulative CI Study ID Relative risk Confidence interval Cumulative RR Cumutlative CI UK Age Trial (UK) 0,83 (0,66-1,04) 0,83 (0,66-1,04) NBSS-1 (Canada) 0,97 (0,74-1,27) 0,89 (0,75-1,06) Malmö (Sweden) (0,58-1,77) 0,9 (0,76-1,06) Stockholm (Sweden) 1,08 (0,54-2,17) 0,91 (0,77-1,07) Göteborg (Sweden) 0,65 (0,40-1,05) 0,87 (0,75-1,02) HIP (USA) 0,75 (0,50-1,11) 0,86 (0,74-0,99) TCS (Sweden) 0,93 (0,63-1,36) 0,86 (0,75-0,99) Edinburgh (UK) 0,75 (0.48-1,18) 0,85 (0,75-0,97)
Table 8: Evidence form HTA review : Breast cancer screening among women aged 40 – 49 Relative risks (intention to treat) with confidence reported for each study together with the results of a stepwise meta-analysis and cumulative CI Study ID Relative risk Confidence interval Cumulative RR Cumutlative CI UK Age Trial (UK) 0,83 (0,66-1,04) 0,83 (0,66-1,04) NBSS-1 (Canada) 0,97 (0,74-1,27) 0,89 (0,75-1,06) Malmö (Sweden) (0,58-1,77) 0,9 (0,76-1,06) Stockholm (Sweden) 1,08 (0,54-2,17) 0,91 (0,77-1,07) Göteborg (Sweden) 0,65 (0,40-1,05) 0,87 (0,75-1,02) HIP (USA) 0,75 (0,50-1,11) 0,86 (0,74-0,99) TCS (Sweden) 0,93 (0,63-1,36) 0,86 (0,75-0,99) Edinburgh (UK) 0,75 (0.48-1,18) 0,85 (0,75-0,97)

54% of referred patients were excluded from the trial and sent directly forward to PCAS because they had a „prohibitive high risk‰. 38 It is unclear who this population might conceivably be, as the risk in the SAPPHIRE trial is low compared to the NASCET and ACE (CEA-) trials.
54% of referred patients were excluded from the trial and sent directly forward to PCAS because they had a „prohibitive high risk‰.38 It is unclear who this population might conceivably be, as the risk in the SAPPHIRE trial is low compared to the NASCET and ACE (CEA-) trials.