Given a passage classify if the passage has a definite objective/aim/goal or not. Output '1' if the passage has a defininte objective/aim/goal and output '0' if the passage does not have a definite objective/aim/goal.
--------
Question: The aim of this study was to describe the revascularization process of autogenous bone block grafts placed with or without an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) membrane.', 'Thirty Wistar male rats had their mandibles augmented by either an autogenous bone block graft (group A) or an autogenous bone block graft covered with an e-PTFE membrane (group B). The animals were sacrificed by perfusion at baseline, 3, 7, 14, and 21 days after surgery.', 'After 3 days, the presence of vascular sprouts derived from the recipient bed was observed in group A; more discrete sprouts were also observed in group B. After 7 days, revascularization continued, with vessels derived from both the recipient bed and the surrounding connective tissue in group A but only from the recipient bed in group B. At 14 days, group A showed penetration of vessels at the periphery of the graft; the vessels reached varying distances inside it. In group B, revascularization of the graft occurred mainly near its perforation, its borders, and at the recipient bed-graft interface. After 21 days, graft vascular penetration could be observed throughout the extent of the graft in group A but only approximately halfway through the graft in group B.

Answer: 1

Question: Primary: to evaluate predictivity of liver stiffness (LS), spleen stiffness (SS), and their ratio assessed by real-time 2D shear wave elastography (RT-2D-SWE) for adverse outcomes (hepatic decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma or death; "event") in compensated liver cirrhosis (LC) patients. Secondary: to evaluate ability of these measures to discriminate between cirrhotic patients with/without esophageal varices (EV).', 'Predictivity of LS, SS, and LS/SS was assessed in a retrospectively analyzed cohort of compensated LC patients (follow-up cohort) and through comparison with incident patients with decompensated cirrhosis (DC) (cross-sectional cohort). Both cohorts were used to evaluate diagnostic properties regarding EV.', 'In the follow-up cohort (n=44) 18 patients (40.9%) experienced an "event" over a median period of 28 months. LS21.5 kPa at baseline was independently associated with 3.4-fold (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-10.4, P=0.026) higher risk of event. Association between SS and outcomes was weaker (P=0.056), while there was no association between LS/SS ratio and outcomes. Patients with DC (n=43) had higher LS (35.3 vs 18.3 kPa, adjusted difference 65%, 95% CI 43%-90%; P<0.001) than compensated patients at baseline. Adjusted odds of EV increased by 13% (95% CI 7.0%-20.0%; Plt;0.001) with 1 kPa increase in LS. At cut-offs of 19.7 and 30.3 kPa, LS and SS had 90% and 86.6% negative predictive value, respectively, to exclude EV in compensated patients.

Answer: 1

Question: It is uncertain whether neck circumference can be a risk indicator for subclinical atherosclerosis. We aimed to investigate their relationships measured by coronary artery calcium (CAC) and common carotid intima-media thickness (cc-IMT) with neck circumference in ELSA-Brasil.', 'In cross-sectional and sex-specific analyses of 2266 women (50.6 8.4 yrs) and 1886 men (50.7 9.0 yrs) with both cc-IMT and CAC, free from previous cardiovascular disease at baseline, we built logistic models using diverse cut-off points for CAC score (0 vs > 0, < 100 vs 100, < 400 vs 400 Agatston units) and cc-IMT (< 75 th percentile vs 75 th; <90th percentile vs 90 th) as dependent variables, after which adjustments for age and traditional cardiovascular risk factors were made. Mean neck circumference was 33.6 ( 2.4 cm) for women and 38.8 ( 2.6 cm) for men. In fully adjusted models including sociodemographic, cardiovascular risk factors and body-mass index and waist circumference, for each 1 standard deviation increase in neck circumference we found an odds ratio (OR, 95% CI) for IMT above the 75th percentile of (1.52, 1.16; 1.99) for women and (1.66, 1.28; 2.14) for men, and above the 90th cc-IMT percentile [1.66 (1.19; 2.32) for men but not for women [1.21 (0.80; 1.82)]. We found no association between neck circumference and CAC using different cut-off points (p > 0.05 for all).

Answer:
1