Part,  Chapter, Paragraph

  1    I,     2.Acr        |        Technology~ISCED~International Standard Classification of Education~
  2    I,     2. 10.  1    | interpretation of this information in standard and easily accessible forms
  3   II,     5.  1.  4    |            must be informed about the standard of care. People affected
  4   II,     5.  2.  2    |       EUROSTAT European population as standard. The age range 35-74 years
  5   II,     5.  2.  2    |              are considered as a gold standard.~ ~
  6   II,     5.  2.  2    |           today are considered a gold standard. The definition of stroke
  7   II,     5.  2.  3    |               14) - Age-standardized (standard European population) mortality
  8   II,     5.  2.  3    |              5.2.5. Age-standardized (standard European Population) cerebrovascular
  9   II,     5.  2.  3    |              5.2.3. Age-standardized (standard European population) mortality
 10   II,     5.  2.  3    |              5.2.4. Age-standardized (standard European population) mortality
 11   II,     5.  3.  2    |               recommendations for the standard data set to be routinely
 12   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 13   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 14   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 15   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~ ~Figure
 16   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 17   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 18   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 19   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~Stomach
 20   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 21   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 22   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 23   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~Figure
 24   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 25   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 26   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 27   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~Colorectal
 28   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 29   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 30   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 31   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~Figure
 32   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 33   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 34   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 35   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~ ~Lung
 36   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 37   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 38   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 39   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~Figure
 40   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 A) Men~Figure
 41   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex in 2006 B) Women~ ~
 42   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex A) Men~Figure 5.
 43   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) by sex B) Women~ ~Female
 44   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) in 2006~Figure 5.3.18.
 45   II,     5.  3.  5    |             incidence rates (European standard)~Figure 5.3.19. Female breast
 46   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) in 2006~Figure 5.3.20.
 47   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard)~ ~Cervical Cancer (ICD-9
 48   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) in 2002~Figure 5.3.22.
 49   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard)~Figure 5.3.23. Uterus cancer
 50   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) in the age class 20-44
 51   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) in the age class 20-44~ ~
 52   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard) in 2006~Figure 5.3.26.
 53   II,     5.  3.  5    |             estimated rates (European standard)~Figure 5.3.27. Prostate
 54   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard) in 2006~Figure 5.3.28.
 55   II,     5.  3.  5    |             mortality rates (European standard)~ ~
 56   II,     5.  3.  7    |       research in Europe is of a high standard, but fragmentation and lack
 57   II,     5.  4.  2    |           Through this source and the standard classification of ATC and
 58   II,     5.  4.  2    |     population, adjusted for European Standard Population~12~National Registry~
 59   II,     5.  4.  6    |              care indicators the gold standard to achieve is 100%. Thus,
 60   II,     5.  5.  3    |             or DDD, and a comparative standard is emerging based on DDD
 61   II,     5.  5.  3    |       industry. The IMS-data document standard dosage units (SU) that are
 62   II,     5.  5.  3    |       treatments in routine care, the standard of guidelines, the degree
 63   II,     5.  5.  3    |             epilepsy still requires a standard definition. In a prospective
 64   II,     5.  6.  3    |            BMD level in women was 2.5 standard deviations or more below
 65   II,     5.  6.  3    |              a BMD value at least 2.5 standard deviations below the mean
 66   II,     5.  6.  3    |               value between 1 and 2.5 standard deviations below the mean
 67   II,     5.  9. FB    |              infancy when compared to standard infant formulas.~ ~Secondary
 68   II,     5.  9.  3    |               prevalence of 1 or more standard error for at least one disorder,
 69   II,     5.  9.  6    |             GINA guidelines, the gold standard for the management of asthma.
 70   II,     5. 10.  2    |               tests) rather than gold standard methodology (i.e food challenge
 71   II,     5. 10.  6    |         studies using common and gold standard diagnostic methods are urgently
 72   II,     5. 11.  3    |          results of patch testing the standard series, 2004. Journal of
 73   II,     5. 11.  3    |          testing, a process whereby a standard battery of known allergens
 74   II,     5. 12.  2    |             method based on the world standard population (Doll and Smith,
 75   II,     7.  2.  1    |             version of ICD is used as standard in most Member States of
 76   II,     7.  4        |      indicators defining the European standard of injury indicators.~(See: htt ~ ~
 77   II,     7.  4        |             in order to calculate the standard injury indicators. Only
 78   II,     8.  2.  1    |               with those who received standard treatment alone. They suggest
 79   II,     9            |        conditions receive the highest standard of care (Macintosh et al,
 80   II,     9.  1.  2    |    comparability between countries. A standard set of minor or poorly defined
 81   II,     9.  1.  2    |             or hospitals do not use a standard coding system. It can be
 82   II,     9.  1.  2    |        conditions receive the highest standard of care (Macintosh et al,
 83   II,     9.  2.  2    |              are at variance with the standard (Robine et al 2004). Organisations
 84   II,     9.  2.  2    |             of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities
 85   II,     9.  2.  3    |            there is remarkably little standard public health information
 86   II,     9.  3.  1    |      collection methods to a European standard are too daunting for States’
 87   II,     9.  3.  1    |            measurable common European standard.~ ~Likewise, attention must
 88   II,     9.  4.  6    |    developments~ ~The improvements in standard of living, the availability
 89   II,     9.  5.  3    |           people have a lower average standard of education than that of
 90   II,     9.  5.  3    |          person’s income. An adequate standard of living for an older person
 91  III,    10.  2.  1    |       prevalence is assessed from the standard questionnaire during a health
 92  III,    10.  2.  1    |            WHO/EURO. OECD also uses a standard health interview survey
 93  III,    10.  2.  1    |        standards called the Gothiatek Standard that sets limits for harmful
 94  III,    10.  2.  1(14)|       methodological issues’ and ‘DRD Standard Protocol, version 3.1’).~
 95  III,    10.  2.  1    |            risk factor definitions; a standard set of age groups for reporting;
 96  III,    10.  2.  1    |               groups for reporting; a standard reporting year; representativeness
 97  III,    10.  2.  1    |              final results to the WHO standard population. Data are available
 98  III,    10.  2.  1    |             WH (2000): Establishing a standard definition for child overweight
 99  III,    10.  3.  4    |               field assessment teams. Standard procedures for the collection
100  III,    10.  4.  1    |            retaining the current PM10 standard and adding a new standard
101  III,    10.  4.  1    |             standard and adding a new standard for PM2.5 – with the so-called
102  III,    10.  4.  2    |             animals)~ ~Existing legal standard ~Exposure, possible~exceedance
103  III,    10.  4.  2    |               system~ ~As of 1-1-2006 standard~for lead in drinking water~
104  III,    10.  4.  2    |            consumption~well below the standard~(WHO: 1.6 ug/kg body~weight
105  III,    10.  4.  2    |               was above~EU/WHO intake standard~ ~ ~Environmental~measures:
106  III,    10.  4.  2    |             animals)~ ~Existing legal standard ~Exposure, possible~exceedance
107  III,    10.  4.  2    |      preparation~ ~Exposure below the~standard; the average daily~intake
108  III,    10.  4.  2    |            sauce~ ~Exposure below the~standard~ ~Monitoring~ ~WHO, 1996~
109  III,    10.  4.  2    |        preparation~Exposure below the standard~Monitoring~WHO, 2001~Fumonisins~
110  III,    10.  4.  2    |        preparation~Exposure below the standard~Monitoring~WHO, 2001~ ~Phycotoxins;
111  III,    10.  4.  2    |             via drinking water,~below standard; sporadic~incidents where
112  III,    10.  4.  2    |          calculated using one of four standard equations, depending on
113  III,    10.  4.  3    |     international reference point for standard setting and drinking-water
114  III,    10.  4.  5    |            introduces a higher health standard than the old directive which
115  III,    10.  4.  5    |              in a timely fashion. New standard signs will be used on all
116  III,    10.  5.  1    |           international definition or standard for “crowding”.~The potential
117  III,    10.  5.  2    |           Correlation of age-adjusted standard mortality rate with urban
118  III,    10.  5.  3    |          which are not covered by the standard survey so called ad hoc
119   IV,    11.  5.  4    |           towards quality and safety. Standard procedures for procurement
120   IV,    12.  1        |            was to improve the general standard of health by improving knowledge
121   IV,    12.  2        |       research in Europe is of a high standard, but fragmentation and lack
122   IV,    12. 10        |         development of an appropriate standard of living for children and
123   IV,    12. 10        |                 will provide a single standard system for admission to,
124   IV,    12. 10        |        Proportion with a low economic standard among families with children,
125   IV,    12. 10        |            people with a low economic standard~Domain of objective 2~ ~