Showing 1,001 - 1,020 results of 1,107 for search '"Austria"', query time: 0.05s Refine Results
  1. 1001
  2. 1002
  3. 1003
  4. 1004
  5. 1005
  6. 1006
  7. 1007
  8. 1008
  9. 1009

    The Protection of the Right to Life at the Intersection between Reproductive Rights and Scientific Progress in the Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the... by Simona Fanni

    Published 2018-01-01
    “…En este sentido, el presente artículo aporta un análisis de los casos que sentaron jurisprudencia, como Artavia Murillo contra Costa Rica y los casos ‘Beatriz’, en relación con la CIDH, y en el marco del TEDH, en Vo contra Francia, Evans contra el Reino Unido, S. H. y Otros contra Austria, Costa y Pavan contra Italia, Parrillo contra Italia y A, B, C contra Irlanda, teniendo al tiempo en consideración las particularidades de los sistemas de la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos y del Convenio Europeo sobre Derechos Humanos, así como el papel de la Convención sobre Derechos Humanos y Biomedicina y sus Protocolos en la jurisprudencia de Estrasburgo. …”
    Get full text
    Article
  10. 1010
  11. 1011
  12. 1012
  13. 1013
  14. 1014
  15. 1015
  16. 1016
  17. 1017
  18. 1018
  19. 1019

    The association of origin and environmental conditions with performance in professional IRONMAN triathletes by Beat Knechtle, Mabliny Thuany, David Valero, Elias Villiger, Pantelis T. Nikolaidis, Marilia S. Andrade, Ivan Cuk, Thomas Rosemann, Katja Weiss

    Published 2025-01-01
    “…Most of the athletes competed in IRONMAN Hawaii (925), IRONMAN Florida (563), IRONMAN Austria (452), IRONMAN France (354), IRONMAN Wisconsin (330), IRONMAN Lanzarote (322) and IRONMAN Texas (313). …”
    Get full text
    Article
  20. 1020

    Evidence-informed language: interpretation and impact on intentions to treat – results of an online survey of medical students and specialists in German-speaking countries by Sven Benson, Reinhard Griebenow, Justine Schmidt, Henrik Herrmann

    Published 2025-02-01
    “…Assessment was based on publicly available proposals for wording to characterise strength of evidence from randomised versus non-randomised trials and of clinical practice recommendations, respectively.Setting The online survey was conducted between September 2021 and March 2022 and promoted by several professional organisations in German-speaking European countries (Germany, Austria and Switzerland).Participants Medical students, trainees and medical specialist (open to all medical specialties).Outcome The survey was composed of two sections: (1) Aim of the first survey section was to assess if the linguistic differentiation between results from randomised versus non-randomised studies is correctly understood as put forward by the proponents. …”
    Get full text
    Article