首页 | 官方网站   微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   1122篇
  免费   90篇
  国内免费   8篇
医药卫生   1220篇
  2020年   8篇
  2019年   8篇
  2018年   19篇
  2017年   13篇
  2016年   8篇
  2015年   11篇
  2014年   19篇
  2013年   35篇
  2012年   41篇
  2011年   43篇
  2010年   33篇
  2009年   45篇
  2008年   42篇
  2007年   49篇
  2006年   48篇
  2005年   34篇
  2004年   39篇
  2003年   35篇
  2002年   28篇
  2001年   39篇
  2000年   30篇
  1999年   21篇
  1998年   34篇
  1997年   33篇
  1996年   47篇
  1995年   45篇
  1994年   44篇
  1993年   30篇
  1992年   18篇
  1991年   24篇
  1990年   14篇
  1989年   27篇
  1988年   37篇
  1987年   25篇
  1986年   25篇
  1985年   20篇
  1984年   14篇
  1983年   7篇
  1982年   8篇
  1981年   9篇
  1980年   11篇
  1979年   5篇
  1978年   5篇
  1977年   11篇
  1976年   9篇
  1975年   13篇
  1973年   5篇
  1972年   6篇
  1970年   5篇
  1966年   4篇
排序方式: 共有1220条查询结果,搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Background

Intentional carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning is responsible for two-thirds of the deaths from CO poisoning in this country and an estimated 15,000 Emergency Department visits annually.

Objectives

In an attempt to optimize medical management of such patients, this study was conducted to examine the frequency and types of toxic co-ingestions that may accompany CO inhalation.

Methods

Records of all patients treated with hyperbaric oxygen for acute, intentional CO poisoning at a regional referral center for hyperbaric medicine in Seattle from 1980 to 2005 were reviewed. For those where co-ingestions were identified, information about type of poison(s) and results of toxicology screens was recorded and analyzed.

Results

Over the 25-year period examined, 433 patients were treated for intentional CO poisoning and records were available for 426. Of those, 188 (42%) had ingested one or more poisons in addition to CO. Ethanol was most common, but a wide variety of other drug classes were also identified. Toxicology screening studies of some type were performed in 49 patients.

Conclusions

Toxic co-ingestions seem to be relatively common in patients treated for intentional CO poisoning. For this reason, providers should be vigilant and open to clinical signs that can’t be explained with CO exposure alone, and ready to treat clinical issues that arise from co-ingestions.  相似文献   
7.

Rationale

Acute and/or chronic exposure to cocaine can affect cognitive performance, which may influence rate of recovery during treatment.

Objective

Effects of the GABA-B receptor agonist baclofen were assessed for potency to reverse the negative influence of acute, pre-session, intravenous (IV) injection of cocaine on cognitive performance in Macaca mulatta nonhuman primates.

Methods

Animals were trained to perform a modified delayed match to sample (DMS) task incorporating two types of trials with varying degrees of cognitive load that had different decision requirements in order to correctly utilize information retained over the delay interval. The effects of cocaine (0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 mg/kg, IV) alone and in combination with baclofen (0.29 and 0.40 mg/kg, IV) were examined with respect to sustained performance levels. Brain metabolic activity during performance of the task was assessed using PET imaged uptake of [18?F]-fluorodeoxyglucose.

Results

Acute cocaine injections produced a dose-dependent decline in DMS performance selective for trials of high cognitive load. The GABA-receptor agonist baclofen, co-administered with cocaine, reversed task performance back to nondrug (saline IV) control levels. Simultaneous assessment of PET-imaged brain metabolic activity in prefrontal cortex (PFC) showed alterations by cocaine compared to PFC metabolic activation in nondrug (saline, IV) control DMS sessions, but like performance, PFC activation was returned to control levels by baclofen (0.40 mg/kg, IV) injected with cocaine.

Conclusions

The results show that baclofen, administered at a relatively high dose, reversed the cognitive deficits produced by acute cocaine intoxication that may have implications for use in chronic drug exposure.  相似文献   
8.
9.

Background

Clomiphene citrate (CC) is first line treatment in women with World Health Organization (WHO) type II anovulation and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Whereas 60% to 85% of these women will ovulate on CC, only about one half will have conceived after six cycles. If women do not conceive, treatment can be continued with gonadotropins or intra-uterine insemination (IUI). At present, it is unclear for how many cycles ovulation induction with CC should be repeated, and when to switch to ovulation induction with gonadotropins and/or IUI.

Methods/Design

We started a multicenter randomised controlled trial in the Netherlands comparing six cycles of CC plus intercourse or six cycles of gonadotrophins plus intercourse or six cycles of CC plus IUI or six cycles of gonadotrophins plus IUI.Women with WHO type II anovulation who ovulate but did not conceive after six ovulatory cycles of CC with a maximum of 150 mg daily for five days will be included.Our primary outcome is birth of a healthy child resulting from a pregnancy that was established in the first eight months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes are clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy and treatment costs. The analysis will be performed according to the intention to treat principle. Two comparisons will be made, one in which CC is compared to gonadotrophins and one in which the addition of IUI is compared to ovulation induction only. Assuming a live birth rate of 40% after CC, 55% after addition of IUI and 55% after ovulation induction with gonadotrophins, with an alpha of 5% and a power of 80%, we need to recruit 200 women per arm (800 women in total).An independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee has criticized the data of the first 150 women and concluded that a sample size re-estimation should be performed after including 320 patients (i.e. 80 per arm).

Discussion

The trial will provide evidence on the most effective, safest and most cost effective treatment in women with WHO type II anovulation who do not conceive after six ovulatory cycles with CC with a maximum of 150 mg daily for five days. This evidence could imply the need for changing our guidelines, which may cause a shift in large practice variation to evidence based primary treatment for these women.

Trial registration number

Netherlands Trial register NTR1449
  相似文献   
10.

LINKED ARTICLES

This is a rebuttal by the authors (Green et al., pp. 1523–1536 of this issue) to a commentary by Parrott, pp. 1518–1520 of this issue. To view the article by Green et al. visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2011.01819.x. To view the commentary by Parrott visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-5381.2012.01941.xWe thank Prof Parrott (Parrott 2012) for his interest in our review (Green et al., 2012). Our main aim was to discuss the problems that arise in interpreting data obtained when administering 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) to experimental animals in terms of possible clinical consequences and vice versa, not to disparage the evidence that Ecstasy is neurotoxic in humans. We presented evidence that the pharmacokinetics of MDMA in rats and primates are fundamentally different from the pharmacokinetics of the drug in humans. Because the plasma half-life of the drug in rats is 10 times shorter than in humans, the acute adverse events in rats may be minimal compared with those in humans, and this includes body temperature and endocrine changes. Conversely, the rapid metabolism of the drug in rats to form neurotoxic metabolites may result in more severe long-term effects in that species than those that may occur in humans.We had no intention of suggesting that there was no evidence for some recreational Ecstasy users presenting with evidence of 5-HT neurotoxicity, albeit it is clear from the literature that some of this evidence remains open to several interpretations. What we did claim was that pure 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) taken alone was unlikely to cause 5-HT neurotoxicity in man. Here we must emphasize the term MDMA, as it is crucial to our discussion. Parrott, in contrast, uses the term ‘Ecstasy/MDMA’ several times when discussing neurotoxicity (Parrott, 2012). This association of Ecstasy with MDMA is one of the major problems of translation that we addressed. The Ecstasy tablet that most recreational users buy and ingest is not necessarily MDMA. Indeed, in many cases, it clearly is not. The tablet is often adulterated with other compounds, and one investigation identified no less than 14 substances other than MDMA in Ecstasy tablets, which users nevertheless presumably believed contained only MDMA (Vogels et al., 2009). Many of the adulterants identified were also psychoactive and included compounds structurally related to MDMA such as 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine and 2-methylamino-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)butane, which have poorly researched pharmacology and toxicology. In addition, most recreational users of Ecstasy also knowingly ingest other psychoactive compounds such as alcohol and cannabis. Alcohol, for example, alters the pharmacokinetics of MDMA (Hamida et al., 2009). While, as Parrott states, clinical studies have attempted to allow for these confounding factors in any examination of the physical and psychological effects of MDMA in humans, such analysis is always limited not only by the other compounds the evaluators are unaware of, but also drugs perhaps not even considered to be relevant by the user and therefore not disclosed. It is unlikely that coffee and ‘energy drinks’ such as Red Bull are always disclosed, but there is now good preclinical evidence that caffeine, which incidentally has also been found as an adulterant in Ecstasy tablets, enhances both the hyperthermia and neurotoxicity induced in rats by MDMA (Camarasa et al., 2006; Vanattou-Saïfoudine et al., 2010). And this brings us to the crux of the problem and weakness of all the clinical data cited by Parrott (2012). A basic tenet of all good clinical pharmacology is accurate knowledge of the doses administered, frequency of administration and any confounding factors such as other drugs being consumed. None of these data are available with any precision in the clinical studies quoted. Of course one has some indication as to dose (although as Vogels et al., (2009) reported, the dose contained in illicitly obtained tablets is highly variable) and frequency of drug ingestion, but this information is generally obtained from the user whose recall is likely to be limited or who decides to obfuscate. Crucially, the information can never take into account the problem of drug tablet adulteration. The fact that hair or urine samples detect MDMA merely shows the user has consumed the drug, not how much or when or what other drugs were taken concurrently.We never suggested that MDMA exposure was not going to be associated with physical or psychological change. However such changes are not necessarily associated with long-term neurotoxic damage. We have shown that long-term behavioural effects can occur in rats both with and without 5-HT neurotoxicity (Fone et al., 2002; Bull et al., 2003; Rodsiri et al., 2011). It is interesting that Parrott approvingly quotes the Verheyden et al. (2003) study in support of his contention that neurotoxic damage has occurred. Because this study noted that the majority of persons reporting chronic psychiatric problems reported ‘improved mental health’ after quitting the drug, this surely allows us to conclude that the drug had produced subacute changes rather than any that could be associated with long-term neurotoxic damage.A further limitation to any clinical study is that one cannot perform prospective studies with the aim of investigating whether long-term neurotoxic events occur, so weaknesses arise with regard to any psychological abnormalities observed. Are persons with high risk of psychiatric problems more likely to misuse the drug, or does the drug induce changes in high-risk individuals? If high risk also happened to be associated with 5-HT abnormalities in the brains, then any conclusion that MDMA has induced neurotoxicity is spurious.We most certainly did not suggest that MDMA acted as a neurotoxin only under conditions of severe hyperthermia as is stated by Parrot in his sixth paragraph (Parrott, 2012). We have been involved in many studies on the effects of MDMA on body temperature in rats (see Docherty and Green, 2010) including one that demonstrated that neurotoxicity can occur in the absence of hyperthermia (O''Shea et al., 1998) and another that showed that hyperthermia worsens neurotoxic damage (Green et al., 2004). In our review, what we did propose was that because of the very different pharmacokinetics of MDMA in rats and humans, it is probable that humans would suffer serious or fatal adverse events at plasma levels below those likely to be required to induce 5-HT neurotoxicity.We emphasize again that we are not denying the clinical observations reviewed by Parrott, but conclude that the effects seen cannot be ascribed solely to the effects of MDMA, as he seems to be proposing. We also repeat our contention that MDMA in combination with other drugs may induce neurotoxicity and this could be said to be supported by the clinical studies quoted by Parrott.Finally, we can but assume that Parrott concurs with our principal conclusion that ‘the doses currently being used to investigate the possible therapeutic benefits of MDMA are unlikely to produce any severe acute or importantly any long-term neurotoxic damage in the human brain’ as he used such a dose (100 mg or approximately 1.4 mg·kg −1) in one of his recent studies in human volunteers (Parrott et al., 2011).  相似文献   
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司    京ICP备09084417号-23

京公网安备 11010802026262号