Showing 801 - 820 results of 21,342 for search '(( ((significant gap) OR (significant burden)) decrease ) OR ( significant decrease decrease ))', query time: 0.49s Refine Results
  1. 801
  2. 802
  3. 803
  4. 804
  5. 805
  6. 806

    Analysis of the Nugent score before (T=0) and after (T=1) the use of the vaginal gel. Number of participants and respective percentages of Nugent scores before and after the intervention. A statistically significant decrease in Nugent scores was observed after the intervention (p value =0.0047). by Adriana Bittencourt Campaner (21175462)

    Published 2025
    “…Number of participants and respective percentages of Nugent scores before and after the intervention. A statistically significant decrease in Nugent scores was observed after the intervention (p value =0.0047).…”
  7. 807
  8. 808
  9. 809
  10. 810
  11. 811
  12. 812
  13. 813
  14. 814
  15. 815

    Preference for the EIA – conjoint results. by Mehdi Mourali (10170245)

    Published 2025
    “…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
  16. 816

    Marginal means – Pooled across scenarios. by Mehdi Mourali (10170245)

    Published 2025
    “…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
  17. 817

    Sample attribute table. by Mehdi Mourali (10170245)

    Published 2025
    “…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
  18. 818

    Subgroup analysis – Political affiliation. by Mehdi Mourali (10170245)

    Published 2025
    “…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
  19. 819

    Sample scenario description. by Mehdi Mourali (10170245)

    Published 2025
    “…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
  20. 820

    AMCEs – Pooled across scenarios. by Mehdi Mourali (10170245)

    Published 2025
    “…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”