Showing 1 - 20 results of 1,234 for search '(( ct ((largest decrease) OR (larger decrease)) ) OR ( six ((we decrease) OR (a decrease)) ))', query time: 0.63s Refine Results
  1. 1
  2. 2

    A flow diagram of the study entry. by Sakiko Fukui (387048)

    Published 2025
    “…We created a time-series dataset for 69 participants, documenting their average weekly food intake (on a scale of 0-10). …”
  3. 3

    Data from: Colony losses of stingless bees increase in agricultural areas, but decrease in forested areas by Malena Sibaja Leyton (18400983)

    Published 2025
    “…On average, meliponiculturists lost 43.4 % of their stingless bee colonies annually, 33.3 % during the rainy season, and 22.0 % during the dry season. We found that colony losses during the rainy season decreased with higher abundance of forested areas and increased with higher abundance of agricultural area around meliponaries. …”
  4. 4

    Inhibition of NEAT1 decreased the miR-204-5p expression and increased Six1 expression. by Lei Li (29537)

    Published 2024
    “…<p>(A) NEAT1 expression following siRNA transfection in BEAS-2B cells; (B-D) The expression of NEAT1, miR-204-5p, and Six1 after decreasing NEAT1 expression. * p <0.05, *** p < 0.001, and **** p <0.0001.…”
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10

    Participants characteristics. by Sakiko Fukui (387048)

    Published 2025
    “…We created a time-series dataset for 69 participants, documenting their average weekly food intake (on a scale of 0-10). …”
  11. 11
  12. 12

    Advancing Circular Bioeconomy through a Systems-Level Assessment of Food Waste and Industrial Sludge Codigestion by Md. Nizam Uddin (21632518)

    Published 2025
    “…Overall, codigesting FW with PPMS is revealed to be a sustainable waste management option to decrease landfill disposal of valuable organic waste.…”
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15

    The Vancouver Scar Scale. by Na Wang (193263)

    Published 2024
    “…</p><p>Results</p><p>We found that numerical rating scale(NRS) score and incidence of breast fistula in group A were significantly lower than other, the continuous decrease of postoperative drainage in group A was higher than other, there were significant differences among groups (p<0.001). …”
  16. 16

    S1 Dataset - by Na Wang (193263)

    Published 2024
    “…</p><p>Results</p><p>We found that numerical rating scale(NRS) score and incidence of breast fistula in group A were significantly lower than other, the continuous decrease of postoperative drainage in group A was higher than other, there were significant differences among groups (p<0.001). …”
  17. 17

    Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). by Na Wang (193263)

    Published 2024
    “…</p><p>Results</p><p>We found that numerical rating scale(NRS) score and incidence of breast fistula in group A were significantly lower than other, the continuous decrease of postoperative drainage in group A was higher than other, there were significant differences among groups (p<0.001). …”
  18. 18

    Mammary fistula (n(%)). by Na Wang (193263)

    Published 2024
    “…</p><p>Results</p><p>We found that numerical rating scale(NRS) score and incidence of breast fistula in group A were significantly lower than other, the continuous decrease of postoperative drainage in group A was higher than other, there were significant differences among groups (p<0.001). …”
  19. 19

    Forest maps affecting lactation outcomes. by Na Wang (193263)

    Published 2024
    “…</p><p>Results</p><p>We found that numerical rating scale(NRS) score and incidence of breast fistula in group A were significantly lower than other, the continuous decrease of postoperative drainage in group A was higher than other, there were significant differences among groups (p<0.001). …”
  20. 20

    Postoperative drainage(ml) (M(IQR)). by Na Wang (193263)

    Published 2024
    “…</p><p>Results</p><p>We found that numerical rating scale(NRS) score and incidence of breast fistula in group A were significantly lower than other, the continuous decrease of postoperative drainage in group A was higher than other, there were significant differences among groups (p<0.001). …”