Part, Chapter, Paragraph
1 II, 5. 5. 1| confidence interval) for a score of MH<55 by country of residence~ ~
2 II, 5. 5. 1| 5.1.5. Odds Ratio for a score MH5<55 by a number of Variables.~ ~
3 II, 5. 5. 1| confidence interval) for a score MH<55 in women with reference
4 II, 5. 5. 1| confidence interval) for a score MH<55 in elderly (65+ year
5 II, 5. 5. 3| guidelines and their AGREE score~Guidelines are intended
6 II, 5. 5. 3| indicated by means of disability score is shown in Table 5.5.3.
7 II, 5. 5. 3| Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS) for prevalent cases (
8 II, 5. 5. 3| assigning to each of them a score. The distribution of the
9 II, 5. 6. 3| to a higher radiological score, with or without the onset
10 II, 5. 6. 3| young adult women (BMD T–score –2.5).~ ~Osteopenia (low
11 II, 5. 6. 3| adult women (–2.5 BMD T–score –1).~ ~Clinically, osteoporosis
12 II, 5. 14. 3| 12, varying around 1-1.5 score of decay severity (DMFT). (
13 II, 9. 1. 1| preterm birth rate, the APGAR score (Apgar, 1953) and hypoxic
14 II, 9. 1. 1| R: Distribution of APGAR score at 5 minutes~F: Causes of
15 III, 10. 2. 1| countries and total TCS score in 2007~ ~The average overall
16 III, 10. 2. 1| 2007~ ~The average overall score has risen over the two years
17 III, 10. 2. 1| various countries; the best score was identified in Nordic
18 III, 10. 2. 1| children across Europe. Score less than 60% was observed
19 III, 10. 5. 2| children in rural areas score significantly better than
20 III, 10. 5. 2| urbanisation and deprived area score~ ~The data clearly show
21 III, 10. 6. 1| by other people. Possible score range from 3 to 14. Scores
22 IV, 11. 1. 5| overall maximum quality score for each practice of 1,050
23 IV, 11. 1. 5| Ireland, are below the mean score for all countries, while
