Search for: "R. (B.), ET AL VS. H. (C.)"
Results 41 - 47
of 47
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jun 2008, 3:28 am
The authors nonetheless recommended the full battery because the latter tests provide some measure of performance impairment (vs. [read post]
2 May 2008, 7:00 am
Landmark IP implications for universities: University of Western Australia v Gray: (IPRoo), (Managing Intellectual Property), (The Age), Domain name transfer made easier: (Australian Trade Marks Law Blog), Quantum of obviousness in Australian patent laws - C Lawson: (IP Down Under), Separating Sony sheep from Grokster (and Kazaa) goats: Reckoning [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 4:02 am
Dennerline, et al vs. [read post]
5 Mar 2008, 4:49 am
R. [read post]
29 Oct 2007, 10:00 am
b. [read post]
15 Sep 2007, 7:49 pm
After an average 12-year follow-up period, no differences were observed in the rates of sexual (21.1% vs 21.8%), violent (42.9% vs. 44.5%) or general (any) recidivism (56.6% vs 60.4%) for treated and untreated groups, respectively. [read post]
1 Mar 2007, 4:57 am
OCs (Estimated Relative Risk or Odds Ratio with 95% CI) Bloemenkamp et al,[8]1995 Case-Control 2.2 (0.9-5.4) Spitzer (Transnational),[9] 1996 Case-Control 1.5 (1.1-2.2) Bloemankamp et al,[13] 1999 Case-Control 1.9 (0.8-4.5) Jick et al (UK-GPRD),[14] 2000 Cohort/Case-Control 1.9 (1.3-2.8)/2.3 (1.3-3.9) Farley et al (WHO),[6] 1995 Case-Control 2.4 (1.3-4.6) Jick et al (UK-GPRD),[7] 1995 Cohort/Case-Control 1.9… [read post]
