INT140978

From wiki-pain
Jump to: navigation, search
Context Info
Confidence 0.18
First Reported 2001
Last Reported 2010
Negated 0
Speculated 0
Reported most in Body
Documents 8
Total Number 8
Disease Relevance 2.40
Pain Relevance 0.17

This is a graph with borders and nodes. Maybe there is an Imagemap used so the nodes may be linking to some Pages.

Impact (Rattus norvegicus)
Pain Link Frequency Relevance Heat
Pain 50 95.40 Very High Very High Very High
visual analogue scale 6 79.60 Quite High
biopsychosocial 4 34.24 Quite Low
cva 13 21.56 Low Low
aspirin 8 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
ischemia 6 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
antagonist 6 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Paresthesia 2 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Trigeminal neuralgia 2 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
palliative 1 5.00 Very Low Very Low Very Low
Disease Link Frequency Relevance Heat
Torticollis 4 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
Disease 36 96.40 Very High Very High Very High
Food Hypersensitivity 96 95.76 Very High Very High Very High
Pain 45 95.40 Very High Very High Very High
Hemorrhage 17 94.20 High High
Injury 52 91.36 High High
Thrombosis Related Under Development 3 89.76 High High
Anxiety Disorder 13 88.96 High High
Hypersensitivity 90 85.44 High High
Death 16 84.12 Quite High

Sentences Mentioned In

Key: Protein Mutation Event Anatomy Negation Speculation Pain term Disease term
In order to analyse the relative burden of impacts among dimensions, three intuitive descriptors of the causes of impacts were used: "impact value", i.e., number of impacts generating a given causal entity, regardless of the dimensions they were recorded in; "impact extension", i.e., the number of dimensions affected by a given causal entity; and "impact prominence", i.e., the percentage of impacts attributable to a given causal entity in a given dimension.


Gene_expression (recorded) of impact value
1) Confidence 0.18 Published 2008 Journal Health Qual Life Outcomes Section Body Doc Link PMC2631008 Disease Relevance 0 Pain Relevance 0.04
In order to analyse the relative burden of impacts among dimensions, three intuitive descriptors of the causes of impacts were used: "impact value", i.e., number of impacts generating a given causal entity, regardless of the dimensions they were recorded in; "impact extension", i.e., the number of dimensions affected by a given causal entity; and "impact prominence", i.e., the percentage of impacts attributable to a given causal entity in a given dimension.


Gene_expression (recorded) of impact extension
2) Confidence 0.18 Published 2008 Journal Health Qual Life Outcomes Section Body Doc Link PMC2631008 Disease Relevance 0 Pain Relevance 0.04
Despite the ‘triple whammy impact’ of introducing MMC with a coordinated UK wide specialty application process (MTAS) on the first cohort (2005–2007) of Foundation doctors, a detrimental effect on their career orientation was not evident.
Gene_expression (introducing) of impact
3) Confidence 0.12 Published 2010 Journal Ulster Med J Section Body Doc Link PMC2993148 Disease Relevance 0.09 Pain Relevance 0
Psychological and emotional impact
Gene_expression (Psychological) of impact
4) Confidence 0.11 Published 2007 Journal BMC Nurs Section Body Doc Link PMC2104527 Disease Relevance 0.49 Pain Relevance 0
Psychological and emotional impact
Gene_expression (emotional) of impact
5) Confidence 0.11 Published 2007 Journal BMC Nurs Section Body Doc Link PMC2104527 Disease Relevance 0.48 Pain Relevance 0
The IMPACT II and ESPRIT trials
Gene_expression (trials) of IMPACT II
6) Confidence 0.06 Published 2001 Journal Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med Section Body Doc Link PMC59641 Disease Relevance 0.53 Pain Relevance 0
Determine clinical impact by comparing the intervention and control sites, individually and collectively, during the "before" and "after" periods for:
Gene_expression (during) of Determine clinical impact
7) Confidence 0.03 Published 2007 Journal Implement Sci Section Body Doc Link PMC1802999 Disease Relevance 0.36 Pain Relevance 0
We compared the responsiveness of the Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile (CDIP-58), Medical Outcome Study Short Form-Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Disability Questionnaire (FDQ), and Pain and Activities of Daily Living subscales of the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) in participants with cervical dystonia treated with botulinum toxin A.
Gene_expression (responsiveness) of Dystonia Impact Profile associated with pain and torticollis
8) Confidence 0.01 Published 2006 Journal Neurology Section Abstract Doc Link 17190951 Disease Relevance 0.45 Pain Relevance 0.10

General Comments

This test has worked.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox