linjc16/ctgov huggingface dataset:
Plantar Pain, Balance and Foot Function in Individuals With Diabetes Mellitus

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and increase of body mass index (BMI) are two one of the most common risk factors for plantar pain and related disability. The aim of our study was to evaluate the relationship between plantar pain, balance and foot function in diabetic DM patients has with different BMI.

Official Title
-----------------
Plantar Pain, Balance and Foot Function in Individuals With Diabetes Mellitus

Conditions
-----------------
Diabetes Mellitus

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Diagnostic Test: balance test


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: having plantar pain and no change in BMI by more than 10% for at least 3 months being volunteer to participate to the study Exclusion Criteria: having musculoskeletal surgery for foot having neurological, orthopedic, and cardiovascular diseases vision and hearing problems that may cause balance disorder

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 35 Years
Maximum Age: 64 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| obese, non-obese<br>obese and non-obese diabetic patients | Diagnostic Test: balance test<br>* balance test<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| the Portable Computerized Kinesthetic Equilibrium Device (SportKAT 550) | balance | 6 months | 
| Foot Function Index | Foot Function Index of 23 items, and evaluates the pain, disability and activity limitation. The each of the pain and insufficiency subscales consist of 9 items and the activity limitation subscale includes 5 items. Patients score their foot pain level with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in various situations during the last 1 week. To calculate the scores of the index, the score of each item are summed, then divided by possible the maximum score can be obtained from the FFI. Higher scores indicate greater pain, disability and activity limitation level. | 6 months | 
| Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index | Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index consists of 4 subsections including 9 questions for inadequacy, 5 questions for pain, 3 questions for concern and 2 questions for difficulty. Each item is scored between 0-2. The total score is calculated by summing the scores from all items. Higher scores indicate worse health situation. | 6 months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
disability, Diabetes Mellitus, plantar pain, body mass index, obesity, balance, foot pain
Corneal Topographic Changes After Pterygium Surgery

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of the study is to assess the corneal topographic changes after primary pterygium surgery

Detailed Description
-----------------
Prospective interventional comparative study . This study will be conducted on eyes with primary pterygium before and after successful excision in department of ophthalmology, Sohag university hospital to assess the corneal topographic changes using pentacam . Postoperative evaluation will be scheduled for one month ,three and six months postoperative.

Official Title
-----------------
Corneal Topographic Changes After Pterygium Surgery

Conditions
-----------------
Pterygium

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: Excision of pterygium


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: patients with primary pterygium Exclusion Criteria: patients with recurrent pterygium patients with primary pterygium with other ocular pathologies.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 20 Years
Maximum Age: 70 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Pterygium<br>Simple surgical excision of pterygium withe bare sclera | Procedure: Excision of pterygium<br>* Simple surgical excision of pterygium with bare sclera<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Changes in corneal topography | Detection of changes in corneal topography using Pentacam | One month, three and six months postoperative |
Kahn Study; Investigation Of The Efficacy Of Ziprasidone Versus Olanzapine In The Management Of Recent-Onset Psychosis; A Flexible-Dose, Parallel Group, Double-Blind Study

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This study intends to compare novel antipsychotics ziprasidone and olanzapine, to confirm the findings of an open study -where stable patients receiving olanzapine switched to ziprasidone- which showed maintenance of clinical effect with improvements in all domains of cognitive function at 6 weeks (Daniel, 1999). Direct comparison of the two agents in a well-controlled double-blind fashion will allow an evaluation of the effect on cognitive function in the short and long-term management of patients with recent-onset schizophrenia, schizoaffective and schizophreniform disorder.

Official Title
-----------------
A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized Trial Of Ziprasidone (80 - 160 Mg) Versus Olanzapine (10 - 20 Mg) In Patients With Recent-Onset Schizophrenia, Schizoaffective And Schizophreniform Disorder.

Conditions
-----------------
Schizophrenia, Psychotic Disorders

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: olanzapine
* Drug: ziprasidone


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Duration of illness < 5 years (according to DSM-IV and onset first psychotic episode); CGI severity score > 4 (moderately ill) maximum exposure to antipsychotic treatment of =< 16 weeks. Exclusion Criteria: Concurrent treatment with antipsychotic agents =< 12 hours prior to randomization for depot agents a period of two weeks or one cycle, whichever is the longer, must occur between last administration and randomization Treatment with antidepressants or mood stabilizers =< 7 days of randomization for MAOIs and moclobemide this period must =< 2 weeks for fluoxetine =< 5 weeks

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 40 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Drug: olanzapine|nan|
|Drug: ziprasidone|nan|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The effect on cognitive function of ziprasidone and olanzapine in the management of recent-onset psychosis, measured as the difference in efficacy in a 8 week period from the baseline visit to the end of week 8 visit. |  |  | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| - to demonstrate effect on cognitive function of ziprasidone and olanzapine in the management of recent-onset psychosis, measured as the difference in efficacy over a 24-week and one year period from baseline visit to the end of week 24 and week 52 visit |  |  |
A Comparison of Symbicort® pMDI 2 x 160/4.5 μg Bid and 2 x 80/4.5 μg Bid With Formoterol Turbuhaler® 2 x 4.5 μg Bid and Placebo in Patients With COPD

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of this study is to compare Symbicort in a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) with formoterol and placebo in the long-term maintenance treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Official Title
-----------------
A 12-Month Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Randomized, Parallel Group, Multicenter Efficacy and Safety Study of Symbicort® pMDI 2 x 160/4.5 μg Bid and 2 x 80/4.5 μg Bid Compared to Formoterol Turbuhaler® 2 x 4.5 μg Bid and Placebo in Patients With COPD

Conditions
-----------------
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Budesonide/formoterol pMDI
* Drug: Formoterol Turbuhaler


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: A clinical diagnosis of COPD with symptoms for more than 2 years. Smoking history of 10 or more pack years A history of at least one COPD exacerbation requiring a course of oral steroids and/or antibiotics within 1-12 months before first visit. Exclusion Criteria: A history of asthma Patients taking oral steroids Any significant disease or disorder that may jeopardize the safety of the patient

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 40 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Drug: Budesonide/formoterol pMDI|nan|
|Drug: Formoterol Turbuhaler|nan|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Pre-dose and 1-hour post-dose FEV1 over the 12 months treatment period |  |  | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Patient-reported outcome variables regarding disease status (incl. PEF), collected via questionnaires and diaries |  |  | 
| Health care utilization |  |  | 
| Safety variables, including adverse events, vital signs, ECG, physical examination, hematology, and clinical chemistry. |  |  | 
| all variables assessed over the 12 months treatment period |  |  |
GlucoVIP - Diabetes Treatment by Glucobay® With a Special Therapeutic View to Chosen Patient Groups

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Evaluation of safety and effectiveness of Glucobay® under daily-life treatment conditions in a large sample of patients.

Official Title
-----------------
Diabetes Treatment by Glucobay® With a Special Therapeutic View to Chosen Patient Groups

Conditions
-----------------
Diabetes Mellitus

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Acarbose (Glucobay, BAYG5421)


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with untreated or pretreated diabetes mellitus or patients for which acarbose is indicated and without acarbose treatment within the last three months before study inclusion. The decision for treatment type and duration is taken by the investigator and is made before inclusion into the study. Exclusion Criteria: Exclusion criteria must be read in conjunction with the local product information.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Group 1<br> | Drug: Acarbose (Glucobay, BAYG5421)<br>* Patients with diabetes type 2 newly treated with Glucobay<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Data collection on patients weight and waist circumference, fasting blood glucose, postprandial blood glucose (2h), HbA1C; exploratory analysis according to patient groups (concomitant cardiovascular disease groups, BMI) |  | During observation period of three months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Diabetes Mellitus
Community Development Teams to Scale-Up Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC) in California

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The effects of using Community Development Teams to increase the number of counties that successfully implement and sustain Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care programs is studied in a randomized trial in 40 California counties. MTFC is an alternative to group or residential placement for youth with severe conduct and emotional problems referred from the juvenile justice and child welfare systems.

Official Title
-----------------
Community Development Teams to Scale-Up MTFC in California

Conditions
-----------------
Behavior Problems

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: Community Development Teams


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Non-early adopters of evidence-based practice (MTFC) Exclusion Criteria: Placed fewer than 6 youth per year in group care
Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: CDT<br>Community Development Teams bring together counties who are implementing a new practice | Behavioral: Community Development Teams<br>* CDTs bring together counties who are implementing a new practice<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Implementation of an evidence-based practice in counties |  | 5 years | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Individualized Implementation, Community Development Teams
Rosacea Prevalence in General Population - Pilot Study

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of this study is to test and refine, a subject questionnaire aimed to be used in a general population rosacea prevalence study.

Detailed Description
-----------------
The study will test the subject questionnaire aimed to be used in a full general population prevalence study to screen potential subjects with rosacea. Questionnaire will be self-administrated to Dermatology outpatients. Testing will be performed at the practice of 2 Dermatologists experts in rosacea who will evaluate subjects' answers and propose fine-tuning of the questionnaire content, if needed.

Official Title
-----------------
Rosacea Prevalence in General Population - Pilot Study

Conditions
-----------------
Rosacea

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: Questionnaire testing


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Male or Female aged between 18 (or locally accepted majority) and 65 years old both included. Subject visiting one of the study dermatology practices for daily care/routine dermatology consultation. Subject have to read and sign the approved Informed Consent form prior to any participation in the study, Subject willing and capable of cooperating to the extend and degree required by the protocol

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 65 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| rosacea patients<br>Questionnaire testing on routine dermatologist patient population | Other: Questionnaire testing<br>* Questionnaire testing on rosacea and non-rosacea dermatology outpatients<br>|
| non-rosacea patients<br>Questionnaire testing on routine dermatologist patient population | Other: Questionnaire testing<br>* Questionnaire testing on rosacea and non-rosacea dermatology outpatients<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| sensitivity and specificity of questions | sensitivity and specificity of each questionnaire key items by comparing subject answers and investigator assessments, as follows: Sensitivity= True Positive/(True Positive+False Negative) Specificity= True Negative/ (False Positive+True Negative) | Day 1 |
Ultrasound Visceral Slide Test for Prediction of Periumblical Adhesions Before Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Ultrasound visceral slide test for prediction of periumbilical adhesions before gynecologic laparoscopic surgery: a prospective cohort study. The investigators are planning to conduct a prospective study to evaluate if there is an effect of abdominal wall thickness and body mass index on slide distance of visceral organ during ultrasound examination.

Official Title
-----------------
Ultrasound Visceral Slide Test for Prediction of Periumblical Adhesions Before Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery: a Prospective Cohort Study

Conditions
-----------------
Periumbilical Adhesions

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Diagnostic Test: preoperative abdominal ultrasound examination


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic surgery for any gynecologic indication. Exclusion Criteria: Emergency laparoscopic surgery Patients under age 18

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 80 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
Female

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic surgery<br> | Diagnostic Test: preoperative abdominal ultrasound examination<br>* Performing preoperative abdominal ultrasound examination in patients that will be scheduled for elective laparoscopic surgery for any gynecologic indication<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Visceral Slide Test | correlation between abdominal wall thickness(mm) and sliding distance of visceral organ(mm) during ultrasound examination | 2 minutes |
The Effect of Doxycycline 100mg and Doxycycline 20mg in Treatment of Mild and Moderate Acne

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of twice daily subantimicrobial dose doxycycline 20mg with daily doxycycline 100mg in treatment of mild and moderate Acne.

Official Title
-----------------
The Effect of Doxycycline 100mg and Doxycycline 20mg in Treatment of Mild and Moderate Acne

Conditions
-----------------
Acne, Inflammation

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Doxycycline


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Acne Exclusion Criteria: Pregnancy

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 40 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Drug: Doxycycline|nan|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
Multiparametric Diagnostic Model of Thick-section Clinical-quality MRI Data in Detecting Migraine Without Aura

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Recently, radiomics combined with machine learning method has been widely used in clinical practice. Compared with traditional imaging studies that explore the underlying mechanisms, the machine learning method focuses on classification and prediction to propose personalized diagnosis and treatment strategies. However, these studies were based on thin-section research-quality brain MR imaging with section thickness of < 2 mm. Clinical, the usage of thick-section clinical setting instead of thin-section research setting is especially important to shorten the acquisition time to reduce the patient's suffering. Here investigators want to build multiparametric diagnostic model of migraineurs without aura using radiomics features extracted from thick-section clinical-quality brain MR images.

Official Title
-----------------
Multiparametric Diagnostic Model of Thick-section Clinical-quality MRI Data in Detecting Migraine Without Aura

Conditions
-----------------
Migraine Without Aura

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Diagnostic Test: diagnostic


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: right-handed International Headache Society criteria for episodic migraine without aura Exclusion Criteria: addition (including alcohol, nicotine, or drug) physical illness

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 21 Years
Maximum Age: 55 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| migraineurs without aura<br> | Diagnostic Test: diagnostic<br>* using radiomics features from multiparametric thick-section clinical-quality brain MRI to distinguish migraineurs from health controls.<br>|
| health controls<br> | Diagnostic Test: diagnostic<br>* using radiomics features from multiparametric thick-section clinical-quality brain MRI to distinguish migraineurs from health controls.<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| accuracy | a measure of statistical bias which measures the proportion of health controls and migrainures that are correctly identified as such. | 2018.7-2019.12 | 
| sensitivity | true positive rate of detection in migraineurs which measures the proportion of actual migraineurs that are correctly identified as such. | 2018.7-2019.12 | 
| specificity | true negative rate measures the proportion of actual health controls that are correctly identified as such. | 2018.7-2019.12 |