Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Several quantitative angiographic methods (visual assessment, digital hand-held calipers, and automated edge detection) have been successfully used to assess coronary atherosclerosis regression. These methods are applicable for (1) continuous measures of disease progression and regression, including patient-based, segment-based, and lesion-based analyses; and (2) categorical assessment of disease progression and regression (the use of a predefined threshold to categorize the course of disease). Angiographic methods and criteria for assessing disease progression each have distinct advantages and disadvantages, which accounts for the methodologic diversity seen in clinical trials.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(01)02326-8 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!