linjc16/ctgov huggingface dataset:
De-identified Human Tissue Project

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Research scientists of the University of Central Florida College of Medicine (COM) and Burnett School of Biomedical Sciences (BSBS) conduct laboratory studies in biomedical and translational medical research for the purpose of understanding human disease and developing innovative methods for diagnosing, measuring, or treating disease or disease symptoms. The key research divisions are cancer, cardiovascular, immunity and pathogenesis, neuroscience, and molecular microbiology.

Detailed Description
-----------------
The objective of this De-Identified Human Tissue Project is the receipt of de-identified human tissue from medical, surgical, and clinical facilities. The human tissue can be fresh or paraffinized. The human tissue will be picked up by the clinical research team and transferred to research scientists of the University of Central Florida's College of Medicine (COM) or Burnett School of Biomedical Sciences (BSBS) for storage and testing according to their separate IRB-approved or IRB-exempted protocols. These separate protocols cannot be for genetic testing. The Project does not receive human tissue resulting from termination of pregnancy.

Official Title
-----------------
De-identified Human Tissue Project for Use With Translational, Biomedical Research at UCF College of Medicine and Burnett School of Biomedical Sciences

Conditions
-----------------
Tissue

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion: - de-identified human tissue from cooperating institutions for unknown/undisclosed donors.

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?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| de-identified human tissue<br>This Project will receive de-identified human tissue from cooperating institutions for unknown/undisclosed donors. | |

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Receipt of de-identified human tissue for research | The key research divisions are cancer, cardiovascular, immunity and pathogenesis, neuroscience, and molecular microbiology. Frequently, these studies require human tissue for testing of assays and devices. | 5 years | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Tissue, surgery, donate
Comparisons of the Therapeutic Effects of Dienogest and Danazol on Endometriosis

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy between dienogest and danazol.

Detailed Description
-----------------
Objective: Women with adenomyosis or endometripsis are often suffered from dysmenorrhea or menorrhagia. Dienogest and danazol are frequently used for the treatment of endometriosis. However, there was no literature mentioned about which medication is better for the treatment of endometriosis. Thus, the aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy between dienogest and danazol. Methods: All consecutive women, who have endometriosis, will be randomized to receive dienogest or danazol treatment, and will assess symptoms severity, receive CA125 examination, sonographic examination at baseline, 4 weeks and 16 weeks after treatment.

Official Title
-----------------
Far Eastern Memorial Hospital

Conditions
-----------------
Endometriosis

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Dienogest
* Drug: Danazol


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: > 20 years old Have an endometriosis-related condition (including adenomyosis, adenomyoma, ovarian endometrioma, or pelvic endometriosis). Exclusion Criteria: Minors. Have a history of breast cancer or other cancers. Patients with vascular obstruction such as stroke.

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

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

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

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: Dienogest<br> | Drug: Dienogest<br>* Dienogest 2 mg per day<br>|
| Active Comparator: Danazol<br> | Drug: Danazol<br>* Danzol 200MG per day<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The change of severity in dysmenorrhea | Between-group difference in the score of global response assessment of dysmenorrhea | 16 weeks | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The change of severity in urinary symptoms | Between-group difference in the score of UDI-6 | 16 weeks | 
| The change of severity in quality of life related to urinary symptoms | Between-group difference in the score of IIQ-7 | 16 weeks | 
| The change of severity in menstrual amount | Between-group difference in the score of global response assessment of menstrual amount | 16 weeks |
Healthy Aging in People With Epilepsy Program

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The goal of this clinical trial is to develop and test an educational program about dementia in older adults living with epilepsy. The main questions it aims to answer are: Can providing education on healthy aging, chronic disease management, dementia, and modifiable lifestyle dementia risk factors improve dementia knowledge and health literacy among older adults with epilepsy? Can aging related education and resources improve quality of life among older adults with epilepsy? Participants will: Complete a 12-week group educational program. Complete pre- and post-program evaluation.

Official Title
-----------------
Healthy Aging in People With Epilepsy Program (HAP-E): Closing the Gap in Epilepsy Care

Conditions
-----------------
Epilepsy

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: Healthy Aging in People with Epilepsy Program


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Current diagnosis of epilepsy made by a neurologist, epileptologist, or internist/family medicine physician Proficiency in English Exclusion Criteria: Dementia

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 55 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: HAP-E Epilepsy Participants<br> | Behavioral: Healthy Aging in People with Epilepsy Program<br>* This a 12-week group educational program providing education on healthy aging, chronic disease management, dementia, and modifiable lifestyle dementia risk factors.<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Dementia Knowledge | Dementia Knowledge Assessment Tool was designed to measure change in knowledge of dementia including dementia and its progress, support, and care. It contains 21 true/false items. | Pre and Post intervention (3 months) | 
| Health literacy | Short Assessment of Health Literacy-English is an 18-item scale assessing adult's ability to read and understand common medical terms. | Pre and Post intervention (3 months) | 
| Health Related Quality of life | Quality of life in Epilepsy-31 is a self-report questionnaire assessing quality of life in individuals with epilepsy. It measures of overall quality of life, emotional well-being, role limitations due to emotional problems, social support, social isolation, energy/fatigue, worry about seizure, medication effects, health discouragement, work/driving/social function, physical function, pain, role limitations due to physical problems, health perception, and perceived problems with attention/concentration, language, memory. | Pre and Post intervention (3 months) |
Quantitative Assessment of Lid Margin Vascularity Using SS-OCTA

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
To explore an optimized scan technique for the detection of lid margin vasculature

Detailed Description
-----------------
To investigate whether the SS-OCTA tool has the potential to characterize the lid margin vascularity in MGD patients. The repeatability and validity of OCTA in assessing eyelid margin blood flow density was evaluated。

Official Title
-----------------
Quantitative Assessment of Lid Margin Vascularity Using Swept-source Optical Coherence Tomographic Angiography

Conditions
-----------------
MGD, Ss-octa, Lid Margin Blood Flow Density

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: The MGD patients were aged >_20 years and were diagnosed according to Chinese MGD diagnostic criteria,11 including dry eye symptoms, and at least one of the following signs: (1) poor meibum expressibility or quality; (2) at least one of eyelid margin abnormalities (lid margin irregularity, plugging of the gland orifice, vascular engorgement/telangiectasia, and anterior replacement of the mucocutaneous junction. Normal subjects were defined as adults without any dry eye symptoms and lid margin abnormality. Exclusion Criteria: (1) subjects with ocular diseases or conditions known to affect the anatomy of the anterior segment, such as acute ocular inflammation, a history of eyelid surgery, contact lens wear within two weeks, and/or eyelid trauma; (2) subjects with of history of systemic or topical medications that might cause ocular congestion; (3) subjects with severe systemic illness or pregnancy; and (4) subjects who were difficult to cooperate with examination, resulting the obtained images were not sufficiently clear for automatic analysis.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 20 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 |
| --- | --- |
| 1<br>Mild group, the scores of both clinicians were ≤ grade 1 | |
| 2<br>Moderate group, one doctor scored grade 2, and the other doctor scored 1 2; | |
| 3<br>Moderate group, one doctor scored grade 2, and the other doctor scored 1 2; | |

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| LMBFD | Lid margin blood flow density | Immediately after ssocta |
Effect of Regional Versus General Anesthesia on Thirty-day Outcomes Following Carotid Endarterectomy: a Matched-pairs Cohort Study.

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The goal of this observational study is to assess the effect of regional versus general anesthesia on carotid endarterectomy thirty-day outcomes. The main questions it aims to answer are: Is regional anesthesia associated with lower incidence of major morbidity and mortality? Is regional anesthesia associated with lower incidences of secondary adverse events? Participants will be sampled from the 2015-2019 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

Official Title
-----------------
Effect of Regional Versus General Anesthesia on Thirty-day Outcomes Following Carotid Endarterectomy: a Matched-pairs Cohort Study.

Conditions
-----------------
Regional Anesthesia Morbidity, Carotid Artery Diseases, Perioperative/Postoperative Complications

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: Anesthetic technique (regional versus general)


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Elective, non-emergent cases Regional anesthesia General anesthesia Exclusion Criteria: Concurrency in procedures Acute kidney injury (preoperative) End-stage renal disease (preoperative) Metastatic disease (preoperative) Wound infection (preoperative) Sepsis (preoperative) ASA 5

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?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Regional anesthesia<br>4,152 patients undergoing elective carotid endarterectomy under regional anesthesia | Procedure: Anesthetic technique (regional versus general)<br>* Anesthetic technique (regional versus general)<br>|
| General anesthesia<br>4,152 matched controls undergoing elective carotid endarterectomy under general anesthesia | Procedure: Anesthetic technique (regional versus general)<br>* Anesthetic technique (regional versus general)<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Major morbidity and mortality | Stoke, myocardial infarction, or death | Thirty days | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Minor morbidity | Reintubation, prolonged (>48 hour) ventilator dependence, pneumonia, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep incisional SSI, organ space SSI, wound dehiscence, sepsis, septic shock, acute kidney injury, and progressive renal insufficiency | Thirty days | 
| Bleeding events | Requiring transfusion | Thirty days | 
| Unplanned resource utilization | Unplanned readmission and unplanned reoperation | Thirty days | 
| Mortality | Mortality | Thirty days |
Herniorrhaphy for Postoperative Pain

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Subjects receive either CPL-01, positive control, or negative control after herniorrhaphy and are then followed.

Official Title
-----------------
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Active-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of CPL-01 in the Management of Postoperative Pain After Open Inguinal Herniorrhaphy

Conditions
-----------------
Hernia, Inguinal

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: local anaesthetic injection


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Able to sign Informed Consent Scheduled to have inguinal hernia repair Be a reasonably healthy adult 18 - 75 years of age Body mass index ≤ 39 kg/m2 If biologically female, not pregnant or planning to become pregnant If biologically male, using acceptable birth control Be willing and able to complete study procedures Exclusion Criteria: Previously inguinal herniorrhaphy Concurrent painful condition that may require analgesic treatment History or clinical manifestation of significant medical, neuropsychiatric, or other condition, significant abnormal clinical laboratory test value, or known bleeding abnormality that could preclude or impair study participation Clinically significant existing arrhythmia, bundle branch block or abnormal ECG, myocardial infarction, or coronary arterial bypass graft surgery within the prior 12 months History of malignant hyperthermia or glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency. Impaired liver function (e.g., alanine aminotransferase [ALT] > 3 × upper limit of normal [ULN] or total bilirubin > 2 × ULN), active hepatic disease, or cirrhosis. Impaired renal function (e.g., creatinine > 1.5 × ULN). Malignancy in the past year Known or suspected daily use of opioids for 7 or more consecutive days within the previous 6 months.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 75 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: Quadruple


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: CPL-01<br>Local infiltration of CPL-01 | Drug: local anaesthetic injection<br>* Local infiltration of study drug<br>|
| Active Comparator: Ropivacaine HCl<br>Local infiltration of Naropin | Drug: local anaesthetic injection<br>* Local infiltration of study drug<br>|
| Placebo Comparator: Placebo<br>Local infiltration of Saline Placebo | Drug: local anaesthetic injection<br>* Local infiltration of study drug<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Pain control | Area under the curve of the numeric rating score for pain with activity, where 0 is no pain and 10 is worst pain imaginable | 72 hours |
Hepatic Artery Stenosis and Thrombosis After Liver Transplantation in Children

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The goal of this observational study is to investigate the incidence, current management practices, and outcomes in pediatric patients with HAC after liver transplantation. Research question: What are the overall incidence of HAC and the effectiveness of all treatment strategies for HAC after pediatric LT? What are the current management practices in the experience of centers, anticoagulant therapy, screening protocol, and assessment criteria for HAC after pediatric LT? The burden of participation is considered to be minimal, and limited to the questionnaires.

Official Title
-----------------
Hepatic Artery Stenosis and Thrombosis After Liver Transplantation in Children: a Multicenter, Retrospective, Observational Study

Conditions
-----------------
Hepatic Artery Thrombosis, Hepatic Artery Stenosis, Pediatric ALL, Liver Transplant; Complications

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion criteria: Liver transplantation between January 1st 2002 and January 1st 2022, diagnoses of HAC after LT The age of the patient is below 18 years at the time of diagnosis and intervention The date of diagnosis of HAC or intervention was before January 1st 2023. HAC occurring after first or subsequent LTs are included. Exclusion criteria: N/A

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 0 Years
Maximum 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 |
| --- | --- |
| Conservative treatment<br> | |
| Surgical revascularization<br> | |
| Endovascular revascularization<br> | |
| Re-transplantation<br> | |

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Graft survival | Graft survival is defined as a functioning graft from transplantation to the end of follow-up data, re-transplantation, or death, whichever occurs first | 1-1-2001 and 1-1-2023 | 
| Patient survival | Patient survival was defined from date of primary LT until date of death. Causes of re-transplantation or death will be recorded. | 1-1-2001 and 1-1-2023 |
High Versus Standard Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency for Cervical Nerve Roots Injection in Refractory Chronic Unilateral Cervical Radicular Pain

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Patients with refractory cervical radiculopathy can get benefit from radiofrequency ablation using specific voltage current to obtund chronic brachialgia. We will compare standard versus supra-voltage current in the efficacy of ablation using numeric rating scale as a primary outcome.

Official Title
-----------------
Comparison Between the Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided High Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency Versus Standard Voltage Pulsed Radiofrequency for Cervical Nerve Roots in Patients With Refractory Chronic Unilateral Cervical Radicular Pain

Conditions
-----------------
Chronic Cervical Radiculopathy

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: radiofrequency ablation


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Age between 20 and 80 years with presence of ≥ 2 months history of neck pain radiating to the arm despite good conservative treatment. Unilateral pain and one level disc prolapse. ≥ 50% temporary pain relief following a diagnostic nerve block with 1 mL of 2% lidocaine Exclusion Criteria: Refusal to participate. Cervical radiculopathy pain recurrence after surgery. Previous attempt of radiofrequency ablation. Concomitant coagulopathic state ( decompensated liver disease, clopidogrel use) . Metastatic lesion in the cervical vertebral column.

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: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Active Comparator: Group H ( high voltage) radiofrequency<br> | Device: radiofrequency ablation<br>* radiofrequency ablation<br>|
| Active Comparator: Group S ( standard) radiofrequency<br> | Device: radiofrequency ablation<br>* radiofrequency ablation<br>|

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

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| numeric rating scale | pain score assessment ( 0 to ten score, score <3 means no or mild pain while score between 4-6 equals moderate pain, score > 6 means severe disabling pain) | 6 month after intervention | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Neck disability index | 1- the impact of treatment on the Neck Disability Index which was evaluated before treatment and at 6 months following treatment | 6 months | 
| complications | cervical epidural hematoma, nerve injury | 6 hours after the procedure |