PA

sponsor
Become a Member Today!
Register
Email:


Password:

Remember me
Forgot your Password?
Invite Code?
Article ID

Your Article Summary

(Click the title below to leave the MDLinx Network and go to the Journal's Website)

Freire CMV et al. – The average timespan for manual measurements (57.30 s) were significantly higher than for automated measurements (2.52 s). There were no systematic errors between methods in any carotid segments. The variation coefficient was 5.54% to 6.34% for CC and BIF, 9.76% for IC, and absolute differences were 85% below 0.1 mm and 70% below 0.05 mm. Interobserver agreement showed no systematic error. The variation and the repeatability coefficients were better for the automated than manual measures. Although both methods are reliable for cIMT measurements, the automated technique allows faster evaluation with lesser variability for all carotid segments currently used in atherosclerosis research.

Today in General Medicine...keeping you current

Carotid Intima-Media Thickness: Knowledge and Application to Everyday Practice
Postgraduate Medicine, 11/25/09

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Role of Bacteria and Updated Guide to Antibacterial Selection in the Older Patient
Drugs & Aging, 11/25/09

Insulin Resistance in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes and Its Relationship to Cardiovascular Function
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 11/25/09


Sponsor

Article Search

Keyword:

Search:

Published within

Sort By:
Date
Relevance


Sponsor

Sponsor

Send this Summary to a Colleague

Enter email address