linjc16/ctgov huggingface dataset:
Use of Goggle Balloon to Improve Cecal Intubation During Colonoscopy

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This study aims to look if use of goggle balloon can help to complete colonoscopy in patients with very redundant colons.

Detailed Description
-----------------
About 5% of colonoscopies are technically difficult because the colon is elongated or redundant. There is an increased risk of the colonoscope not reaching the cecum in these cases. One solution to this is to try to keep the colon shorter by not insufflating it with gas. In order to achieve that, in these cases the investigators typically fill the colon with water, which does not distend the colon as much. Another technique, which can improve visualization, is to use a device called the goggle balloon. This is a small balloon filled with a few mL of water which fits over the end of the colonoscope and pushes the colonic mucosa away from the end of the scope so that the luminal direction can be visualized with minimal insufflation. In patients with normal colons, the goggle balloon can be used to insert the colonoscope to the cecum with virtually no air or water filling. We aim to study if the goggle balloon can be used to help complete the colonoscopy in patients with redundant colons.

Official Title
-----------------
Use of Goggle Balloon to Improve Cecal Intubation During Colonoscopy

Conditions
-----------------
Redundant Colon

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: goggle balloon
* Other: water immersion only


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Referral for incomplete colonoscopy Exclusion Criteria: Known stricture or narrowing of the colon, prior colon resection

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


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Active Comparator: water immersion only<br>Colonoscopy will be performed using the water immersion technique. | Other: water immersion only<br>* Colonoscopy will be performed using a goggle balloon at the tip of the scope with water immersion technique.<br>|
| Experimental: water immersion with goggle balloon<br>Colonoscopy will be performed using a goggle balloon at the tip of the scope with water immersion technique | Device: goggle balloon<br>* Colonoscopy will be performed using the water immersion technique.<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| number of subjects with complete colonoscopy in each arm |  | 2 years | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Time to cecal intubation in each arm |  | 2 years |
Personalized Objects Can Improve the Diagnosis of EMCS From MCS

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
In this study，researchers will use personalized objects to assess patients' level of consciousness in chronic patients in minimally conscious state (MCS).

Detailed Description
-----------------
The Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is an important tool for the assessment of behaviors in DOC.Clinical practice has shown that self-referential stimuli, such as the patient's own name and face, are more effective to elicit the patient's response than that of non-self-referential stimuli. The item Functional Object Use was assessed by using personalized objects (e.g., cigarette, paper) and non-personalized objects, which presented in a random order.The rest assessments were performed following the standard protocol of CRS-R. The differences between functional use of the two types of objects was analyzed by Chi-square test. Researchers expected to see some of the patients in MCS are re-diagnosed as EMCS with the using of personalized objects.

Conditions
-----------------
Patients in Minimally Conscious State

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: Personalized Objects
* Behavioral: non-personalized Objects


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: patients in minimally conscious state; patients with stable condition; each patient has athletic ability to some extent. Exclusion Criteria: premorbid neurology antecedent; patients in coma or vegetative state; patients < 1 months after the acute brain injury.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 15 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: Diagnostic
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Quadruple


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Other: Personalized Objects<br>The item Functional Object Use was assessed by using personalized objects (e.g., cigarette, paper) and non-personalized objects, which presented in a random order.. | Behavioral: Personalized Objects<br>* personalized objects are based on the observation or the reports from family<br>Behavioral: non-personalized Objects<br>* non-personalized objects are based on the suggestion in CRS-R,which are comb and cup<br>|
| Other: non-personalized objects<br>The item Functional Object Use was assessed by using non-personalized objects | Behavioral: non-personalized Objects<br>* non-personalized objects are based on the suggestion in CRS-R,which are comb and cup<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The frequency of behavioral response elicited by the stimuli suggested by CRS-R scale and the personalized stimuli they prefer |  | one week |
Body Weight Growth After Birth and Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is one of the most common, complex, and severe diseases in preterm infants. BPD was first described as chronic pulmonary disease in survivors of severe respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in 1967, which was also called as the old BPD. In recent years, the definition for BPD has developed a lot. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) workshop in 2018 assessed BPD at 36 post-menstrual age (PMA) along with radiographic confirmation and used a severity grading of I-III. Although with effective surfactant supplement and oxygen support, BPD brings a great challenge to neonatologists.

Detailed Description
-----------------
Besides persistent inflammation, prolonged invasive ventilation and oxidative damage. body weight is the one of the most important factors to induce BPD. Poor extrauterine growth is commonly described in extremely preterm infants. But, the relationship of postnatal growth with BPD and respiratory morbidity is not entirely understood. The aim of the present study is to assess whether body weight growth after birth is the risk factor for BPD.

Official Title
-----------------
Association of Body Weight Growth After Birth and Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia(BPD)

Conditions
-----------------
Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia, Preterm

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: good body weight growth
* Other: poor body weight growth


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: equal to or less than 32 weeks' gestational age Exclusion Criteria: main congenital malformation parents' refusal

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 1 Minute
Maximum Age: 1 Day

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

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

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| good body weight growth<br>body weight growth after birth is consistent with the growth curve | Other: good body weight growth<br>* body weight growth after birth is consistent with the growth curve<br>|
| poor body weight growth<br>body weight growth after birth is inconsistent with the growth curve | Other: poor body weight growth<br>* body weight growth after birth is inconsistent with the growth curve<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| the incidence of BPD | the infant was diagnosed with BPD | up to 36 weeks' gestational age | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| body weight growth after birth | to assess whether body weight growth after birth is consistent with the growth curve | up to 36 weeks' gestational age |
Biomechanics/Motion Analysis Laboratory Data Bank

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of the data bank is to collect data on joint motion.

Detailed Description
-----------------
Biomechanical aspects, including ground reaction forces, range of motion of involved extremities, EMG data and videotape records of human motion will be collected and stored as part of the normal clinical care of patients seen in the UF Biomechanics/Motion Analysis Laboratory. All persons seen in motion analysis laboratory will be told of study and asked to participate. Those agreeing to participation will give informed consent.

Official Title
-----------------
University of Florida Biomechanics/Motion Analysis Laboratory Data Bank

Conditions
-----------------
Kinematics

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: Joint Motion Analysis


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Any person having joint analysis done for medical or personal need Exclusion Criteria: None, any person having joint analysis done for medical or personal need and interested in participation will be asked to sign informed consent.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 2 Years
Maximum Age: 75 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 |
| --- | --- |
| Joint Motion Analysis<br>Joint motion will be recorded for analysis. | Behavioral: Joint Motion Analysis<br>* Joint motion will be recorded for analysis.<br>* Other names: No other names;|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Range of Motion values | Joint range of motion is measured in degrees for the hips, knees, ankles, shoulders and elbows | one day |
Triple Therapy of Pars Plana Vitrectomy and Grid/Focal Laser for Diabetic Macular Edema (DME)

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This study is designed to report 3-year result of triple therapy of vitrectomy, intravitreal triamcinolone and macular laser photocoagulation for intractable diabetic macular edema. Previously author reported 1-year result(Am J Ophthalmol. 2007 Dec;144(6):878-885. Epub 2007 Oct 15.).

Official Title
-----------------
Three-year Result of Triple Therapy of Vitrectomy, Intravitreal Triamcinolone and Macular Laser Photocoagulation for Intractable Diabetic Macular Edema

Conditions
-----------------
Diabetic Retinopathy, Macular Edema

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: Triple therapy of vitrectomy, IVTA and grid/focal laser photocoagulation


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus intractable diffuse DME (diffuse DME which did not respond to or recurred after the previous IVTA and/or macular focal laser photocoagulation) central subfield macular thickness (CST) greater than 250μm Exclusion Criteria: presence of vitreomacular traction a prior history of treatment for the DME within 3 months or vitreoretinal surgery

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 20 Years
Maximum Age: 80 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

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Procedure: Triple therapy of vitrectomy, IVTA and grid/focal laser photocoagulation|all pars plana vitrectomy were accompanied with removal of retinal Internal limiting membrane (ILM) around fovea in round fashion with a dimension of approximately 2 disc diameters. IVTA was introduced at the end of surgery or on the next day (4mg in 0.1cc). Two weeks afterward, fluorescein angiography guided macular laser photocoagulation which consisted of direct photocoagulation on leaking microaneurysms and application of grid pattern laser was undertaken.|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Best-corrected visual acuity | Measurement of visual acuity at every visit. VA at every visit was compared from VA at baseline | At baseline, 6,12,24,36 months after surgery | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Central subfield macular thickness | Automatically measured central subfield thickness from Stratus OCT | 0,6,12,24,36 months after surgery | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Diabetic macular edema, Combination therapy for DME, DME
Glycaemic Load and Pre-meal Insulin Doses in Type 1 Diabetes Patients

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The aim of this study is to compare the feasibility and the efficacy on short-term glucose control of pre-meal insulin doses adjustment made on the bases of the glycemic load or of the carbohydrates content of the meal in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus treated with insulin pump

Official Title
-----------------
Use of the Glycemic Load for the Adjustment of the Dose of Preprandial Insulin in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus in Insulin Pump Therapy

Conditions
-----------------
Type 1 Diabetes

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: Adjustment of pre-prandial insulin doses on the bases of glycaemic load of the meal
* Other: Adjustment of pre-prandial insulin doses on the bases of carbohydrates content of the meal


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Type 1 diabetes treated by insulin pump Exclusion Criteria: Preganncy HbA1c > 9% Any serious acute or chronic illness a part diabetes

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

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

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

Design Details

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


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Glycaemic load<br> | Other: Adjustment of pre-prandial insulin doses on the bases of glycaemic load of the meal<br> <br> |
| Active Comparator: Carbohydrates content<br> | Other: Adjustment of pre-prandial insulin doses on the bases of carbohydrates content of the meal<br> <br> |

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| daily plasma glucose excursion |  | 1 week | 
| mean plasma glucose concentrations |  | 1 week | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| postprandial plasma glucose concentrations |  | 1 week |
Gabapentin in Phantom and Stump Pain

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
To investigate whether gabapentin can prevent phantom and stump pain after amputation.

Official Title
-----------------
Gabapentin in the Prevention of Phantom Limb Pain

Conditions
-----------------
Amputation of Lower Limb

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Gabapentin


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: 1. Amputation of crus or femur Exclusion Criteria: Patients who cannot cooperate Fertile women without sufficient contraceptives Allergy to gabapentin Earlier amputation of the same limb except toes Serious lever, kidney, cardiac, respiratory, haematological disease.-

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: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

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

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Primary outcome measures: |  |  | 
| Number of patients with phantom and stump pain 30 days and 6 months after amputation |  |  | 
| Average intensity of stump and phantom pain 30 days and 6 months after amputation |  |  | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Secondary outcome measures: |  |  | 
| Prevalence and severity of phantom and stump pain at controls day 7, 14 and 30, and 3 and 6 months |  |  | 
| McGill Pain Questionnaire day 7, 14 and 30, and 3 and 6 months |  |  | 
| Concurrent pain medication at day 7, 14 and 30, and 3 and 6 months |  |  | 
| Brush evoked allodynia, wind up like pain to repetitive pinprick, pressure pain threshold at day 14 and 30. |  |  |
Comparative Cycle Control Europe

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The aim of this study is to evaluate bleeding pattern, cycle control, and safety of this new four-phasic oral contraceptive in comparison to a reference OC.

Detailed Description
-----------------
The study has previously been posted by Schering AG, Germany. Schering AG, Germany has been renamed to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Germany.Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Germany is the sponsor of the trial.

Official Title
-----------------
A Multi-center, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Controlled, Randomized Study to Evaluate Cycle Control and Safety of a Four Phasic Oral Contraceptive (SH T00658ID) in Comparison to an Oral Contraceptive Containing Ethinylestradiol and Levonorgestrel (SH D 593 B) in Healthy Female Volunteers Aged Between 18 and 50 Years.

Conditions
-----------------
Contraception

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: EV/DNG (Qlaira, BAY86-5027, SH T00658K)
* Drug: SH D 593 B (Miranova)


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Healthy female volunteers aged between 18 and 50 years requiring contraception Exclusion Criteria: Pregnancy or lactation Any conditions that might interfere with the outcome as well as all contraindications for OC use

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 50 Years

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

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

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

Design Details

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


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Arm 1<br> | Drug: EV/DNG (Qlaira, BAY86-5027, SH T00658K)<br>* 7 cycles each consisting of 28 days (no tablet-free intervals); Day 1-2: 3.0 mg EV; Day 3-7: 2.0 mg EV + 2.0 mg DNG; Day 8-24: 2.0 mg EV + 3.0 mg DNG; Day 25-26: 1.0 mg EV; Day 27-28: placebo;In addition SH D 593 B (Miranova) matching placebo<br>|
| Active Comparator: Arm 2<br> | Drug: SH D 593 B (Miranova)<br>* 7 cycles each consisting of 28 days (no tablet-free intervals); Day 1-21: 0.02 mg EE + 0.10 mg LNG; Day 22-28: placebo; In addition EV/DNG (Qlaira, BAY86-5027, SH T00658K) matching placebo<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Bleeding pattern |  | 7 treatment cycles each consisting of 28 days | 
| Number of unintended pregnancies |  | 7 treatment cycles each consisting of 28 days and follow-up period of 14 days | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Adverse event collection |  | 7 treatment cycles each consisting of 28 days and follow-up period of 14 days |
Tegmen Defect Management During Mastoidectomy

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
In this study, we aimed to discuss our clinical experience on the management of the tegmen defects which were revealed during the mastoidectomy surgeries.

Official Title
-----------------
Clinical and Postoperative Radiologic Assessment and Long Term Results of Tegmen Defects During Mastoidectomy

Conditions
-----------------
Chronic Otitis Media

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Diagnostic Test: physical examination, and computerized tomography


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: underwent mastoidectomy as alone or as a part of the surgery, and noticed tegmen mastoideum or tympani defect in related department. Exclusion Criteria: patients who did not come to follow up

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 12 Years
Maximum Age: 74 Years

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

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

Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Diagnostic Test: physical examination, and computerized tomography|physical examination, and computerized tomography was performed during routine follow-up|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| defect size | decreased size of the defects were examined | a year |