linjc16/ctgov huggingface dataset:
The Relationship Between Oxygen Reserve Index and PaO2

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Oxygen Reserve Index (ORI) is a new parameter for noninvasive monitoring of oxygen reserve using oximetry sensor. In this study, the investigators evaluate the correlation between ORI and the partial pressure of arterial blood oxygen (PaO2) in children.

Official Title
-----------------
The Relationship Between Oxygen Reserve Index and PaO2 in Children

Conditions
-----------------
Children

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: Pulse Oximeter with ORI


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Age below 7 years Written informed consent Undergoing cardiac surgery Exclusion Criteria: Presence of cyanotic heart disease

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Maximum Age: 7 Years

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

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

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

Design Details

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


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Test group<br>All subjects will be enrolled in the test group and will receive Pulse Oximeter with ORI. | Device: Pulse Oximeter with ORI<br>* Pulse oximeter that measure Oxygen Reserve Index<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| correlation coefficient between ORI and PaO2 | correlation coefficient between ORI and PaO2 | through study completion, an average of 5 hours |
Prospective, Non-Randomized Evaluation of Carbon Dioxide Gas as a Contrast Agent in Comparison With Iodinated Contrast in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) requires a contrast agent to identify the vascular anatomy and placement of the stent graft. Iodine contrast has traditionally been used, but has the potential to harm the kidneys. Another contrast agent is carbon dioxide gas. It has been proven safe to use, but the quality of the images it creates needs to be compared to iodine contrast. Patients in this study undergo the endovascular AAA repair as they normally, with the iodine contrast. At the end of surgery carbon dioxide gas contrast is given as an extra step. The images will be later evaluated.

Conditions
-----------------
Carbon Dioxide, Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurym Repair, Prospective, Angiogram

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: Carbon dioxide angiogram


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm amendable to endovascular repair Exclusion Criteria: renal failure or contraindication to receiving iodine contrast.
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 |
| --- | --- |
| 1<br>There is no control or experimental group. The same patients undergoing endovascular AAA repair with serve as their own control | Procedure: Carbon dioxide angiogram<br>* see description of procedure<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
Evaluation of the 1999 and 2018 Periodontal Disease Classifications: a Retrospective Study

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The aim of present study was to evaluate how the 2018 classification reflects the severity, extent and progression of the disease, taking into account the risk factors for periodontal disease, smoking and diabetes, when compared with the 1999 classification.

Official Title
-----------------
Evaluation of Diabetes Mellitus and Smoking on Periodontitis Classifications Using the 1999 and 2018 Periodontal Disease Classifications: a Retrospective Study

Conditions
-----------------
Diabetes Mellitus, Smoking, Periodontal Diseases

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with a complete periodontal chart and full mouth radiographic series at baseline Diabetes Mellitus:Patients who consulted by an internist/endocrinologist and underwent HbA1c measurements in the last three months. Smoking status:All current smokers who had smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetimes and used cigarettes for more than five years Patients meeting the case definition of periodontitis Relative radiographic bone loss(in %) was assessed on peri-apical radiograph films Exclusion Criteria: individuals with a systemic disease other than diabetes Smokers not reporting the number of cigarette/days or patient(s) with diabetes that do not report Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) test results for diabetes. individuals who do not suffer from periodontitis Patients with inaccessible files because of bad debt, destroyed record, or deceased.

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

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

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

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------
What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The advantages of including the effect of diabetes and smoking on periodontal disease in the 2018 classification compared to the 1999 classification | In our study, both classifications reflected the severity of periodontal disease differently. The 2018 classification outperformed the 1999 classification for staging and grading of periodontitis severity and progression. Consideration of the risk factors listed in the 2018 classification has been useful approach for correct diagnosis, evidence-based clinical decisions, prognosis of treatment, and periodontal disease prevention. The 2018 periodontal disease classification is more detailed and comprehensive than the 1999 classification, and this classification is thought to revise the criticisms of the 1999 classification. | The present retrospective study included individuals who were examined and had periodontal measurements made and recorded at the Istanbul Okan University Periodontology Department between 09/01/2018 and 12/01/2019. |
Preemptive Lung Impedance-guided Therapy of Evolving Acute Heart Failure in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
It is well known that 20-25% of patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction will develop acute heart failure during their hospitalization. Currently, the investigators have no reliable parameter for prediction of evolving acute heart failure in such a group of patients. As a result, the investigators have no way of preventing acute heart failure. Treatment of these patients only begins after appearance of clinical signs of acute heart failure. Lung impedance monitoring may be a good non-invasive parameter for prediction of evolving acute heart failure. This study will attempt to address whether preemptive lung impedence-guided therapy may prevent the development of overt acute heart failure and improve their clinical outcome.

Conditions
-----------------
Acute Heart Failure

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: Lung impedence-guided therapy
* Other: Usual treatment of patients with developing acute heart failure


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients hospitalized in the ICCU for acute myocardial infarction and developing acute heart failure during their hospitalization Exclusion Criteria: Patients with acute myocardial infarction with clinical and radiological signs of acute heart failure at admission
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

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Placebo Comparator: Control<br> | Other: Usual treatment of patients with developing acute heart failure<br> <br> |
| Active Comparator: Lung impedence-guided treatment<br> | Device: Lung impedence-guided therapy<br> <br> |

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Prevention of acute heart failure development in acute MI patients |  | Three years | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Improvement of clinical outcome in patients with lung impedence-guided treatments |  | Three years | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Developing acute heart failure
Pain Evaluation in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is an inflammatory chronic rheumatism where the pain remains the priority domain of improvement for the patients instead a good control of the inflammatory disease by treatments, even biotherapeutics . Some studies show that less than 50 % of the patients is satisfied by the care of the pain, whereas the criteria of evaluation of the RA improve under treatment. The chronic pain, is a complex and multifactorial subjective phenomenon requiring a multidimensional evaluation, while the current criteria of follow-up of the RA (DAS28, ACR criteria) investigate the pain in a single dimension that is the pain intensity. So, the investigators do not arrange explanation for this observed dichotomy between the improvement of the clinical and biological inflammatory criteria of the RA and on the other hand the persistence of pain. On the other hand, the interleukin (IL)-6, IL-17 and IL-33 are cytokines occurring in the physiopathology of RA and probably in the pain processing according to recent data of the literature. The aim of this study is: to assess the multidimensional origin of the pain in RA patients by means of questionnaires to look for a possible correlation between the serum level of cytokines and pain.

Official Title
-----------------
Multidimensional Evaluation of Pain in Rheumatoid Arthritis (Douleur PR)

Conditions
-----------------
Rheumatoid Arthritis

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Adults with RA treated with DMARDs and/or biotherapy, Capable of providing written consent Exclusion Criteria: Patients affected by a painful disease other one than RA, Fibromyalgia, A malignancy disease, An hemopathy, Psychiatric disorders or dementia and Acute infectious diseases and Receive or had received anti-IL6 therapy

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

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

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

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------
What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Evaluation of the pain | Multidimensional evaluation of the pain using standard questionnaires: HAS, Beck and Speilberger , Erosion Narrow Score and Fibromyalgia diagnostic criteria | At day 1 | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Patients pain care | Estimate the satisfaction of the patients towards the coverage (care) of their pain by means of VAS and verbal scale of satisfaction | At day 1 | 
| Correlation | Estimate the correlation between the activity of the RA and the multidimensional evaluation of pain using DAS28 questionnaire | At day 1 |
Feasibility of Pharmaceutical Interventions in Elderly Heart Failure Patients.

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Heart failure therapies (e.g. beta blockers) have been successful in decreasing mortality rates, as well as diminishing hospitalizations. Also, pharmacist collaboration has been shown to have a beneficial impact on heart failure related outcomes. Regardless, a high residual event rate is to be noted. In our pilot study, we wished to document whether a clinical pharmacist could still play a role in the heart failure management of an elderly inpatient heart failure population.

Official Title
-----------------
Feasibility of Pharmaceutical Interventions in Elderly Heart Failure Patients: a Pilot Study.

Conditions
-----------------
Heart Failure

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: heart-failure related pharmaceutical intervention


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: 75 years or older diagnosis of previous or new heart failure based on signs and symptoms as defined by the 'European Society of Cardiology guidelines on acute and chronic heart failure' diagnosis had to be confirmed by a recent echocardiogram Exclusion Criteria: not Dutch speaking treatment restrictions had been applied on admission

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 75 Years

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

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

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

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
Allocation: Non-Randomized
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: clinical pharmacy intervention<br> | Other: heart-failure related pharmaceutical intervention<br> <br> |

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| the number of heart-failure related pharmaceutical interventions |  | during hospital stay (average of 14 days) | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| acceptance rate of the pharmaceutical interventions |  | during hospital stay (average of 14 days) | 
| clinical feasibility of the accepted interventions |  | during hospital stay (average of 14 days) | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Elderly, Frailty, Polypharmacy, Medication review, Clinical pharmacy services
Current Trends and Future Perspectives Regarding Elective Rotations

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Surgical resident elective rotation abroad give different opportunity such experience a different teaching and training, acquire more and new operative experience, experience living and working in a different cultural environment. Furthermore, the growing process of globalization that involves the nations themselves in different sectors, should also lead to a homogeneity of training on a global level, in order to be able to guarantee adequate assistance to different types of patients at the same time, and the possibility for doctors themselves of working abroad. the objective of the study is to provide the first overview of what is the current Italian scenario concerning abroad elective rotations during surgical training

Official Title
-----------------
Current Trends and Future Perspectives Regarding Elective Rotations Abroad Within Italian Surgical Residency Training: Is the Glass Half Empty or Half Full?

Conditions
-----------------
Surgery

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: Survey


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: working as short-term supernumerary registrars in a foreign surgical department during the academic year 2017-2018 Exclusion Criteria: Surgeons/residents who have not been abroad for training
Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

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

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

Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Other: Survey|survey|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Satisfaction grade of actual elective rotation abroad in Italy | A five point Likert-type scale | 1 years | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Gender | Ratio male/gender | 1 year | 
| Age at time of elective training | Age | 1 year | 
| Year of residency at the time of elective training | Multiple choice answers accounting 1 to 6 | 1 year | 
| Institution visited | Multiple choice accounting 5 option such as university hospital, tertiary care hospital, referral center | 1 year | 
| Global surgical exposure | A five point Likert-type scale | 1 year |
QOL Assessment in Cancer Survivors Integrated Into Routine Clinical Care

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This observational cohort study of patients who received cancer treatment (of any modality) in the last 18 months are evaluated by the use of a validated QOL tool (FACT-GP) and are evaluated via telephone or in person or both. Patients with high-risk for unmet needs or distress as determined by the FACT-GP are referred to an in-person Multidisciplinary Cancer Survivorship Clinic. This is considered standard of care at the investigator's institution and is part of the continuous clinical quality improvement program within the Geisinger Cancer Institute.

Official Title
-----------------
Quality of Life Assessment in Cancer Survivors Integrated Into Routine Clinical Care Implementation in an Integrated Health System

Conditions
-----------------
Cancer

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Diagnosis of malignancy in the last 18 months, treated with curative intent Exclusion Criteria: Patients treated with palliative intent, metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis
Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

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

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------
What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Survivorship Care Plan (SCP) is completed and given to the patient | A completed Survivorship Care Plan (SCP) as defined by the American College of Surgeons, Committee on Cancer (ACS-CoC) is completed by a member of the clinical care team and is provided personally to the patient. | Within 12 months of date of diagnosis | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Oncology Behavioral Health Referral Follow-up | FACT-GP v.4, Emotional Well-Being Sub-score (EWB) are referred to the Oncology Behavioral Health Service for an evaluation by a PhD behavioral health practitioner. | Within 30 days of administration of FACT-GP | 
| Emergency Department utilization, 30 days after completion of SCP | Percentage of patients who present to an Emergency Department as captured in central clinical data architecture | Within 30 days of receipt of Supportive Care Plan | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Survivorship
This Study is An Open-Label Trial Of Pregabalin In Patients With Fibromyalgia

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The main purpose of this protocol is to evaluate the long-term safety of pregabalin in patients who participated in the previous fibromyalgia Study A0081100 and who wish to receive open-label pregabalin therapy.

Official Title
-----------------
A 12 Week, Open-Label, Safety Trial Of Pregabalin In Patients With Fibromyalgia

Conditions
-----------------
Fibromyalgia

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Pregabalin


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients must have met the inclusion criteria for the preceding fibromyalgia Protocol A0081100, and must have received pregabalin/placebo under double-blind conditions. Exclusion Criteria: Patients may not participate in the study if they experienced a serious adverse event during the previous fibromyalgia Study A0081100 which was determined to be related to the study medication by the investigator or the sponsor.

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

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

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

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

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Non-Randomized
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: 1<br> | Drug: Pregabalin<br>* 150 to 600mg/day<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Change From Baseline to Week 4 in Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score | Mean Change: Observation VAS score minus Baseline score. Pain VAS: 100 mm horizontal line to rate (score) pain from 0 no pain to 100 worst possible pain. Baseline = value @ double-blind screening if randomized to pregabalin during double-blind or value @ last visit from double-blind if randomized to placebo during double-blind. | Week 4 | 
| Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score | Mean Change: Observation VAS score minus Baseline score. Pain VAS is a 100mm horizontal line used to rate (score) pain by subject from 0 no pain to 100 worst possible pain. Baseline=value @ double-blind screening if randomized to pregabalin during double-blind OR value @ last visit from double-blind if randomized to placebo during double-blind. | Week 12 (end of treatment) |