Search alternatives:
significantly decreased » significantly increased (Expand Search), significantly correlated (Expand Search), significant increase (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significant bias » significant based (Expand Search), significant gap (Expand Search), significant degs (Expand Search)
bias decrease » sizes decrease (Expand Search), bias increases (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
significantly decreased » significantly increased (Expand Search), significantly correlated (Expand Search), significant increase (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significant bias » significant based (Expand Search), significant gap (Expand Search), significant degs (Expand Search)
bias decrease » sizes decrease (Expand Search), bias increases (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
-
81
Mean differences for the post-intervention DASH.
Published 2024“…Sensitivity analysis excluding studies with high risk of bias showed similar results, with exception of injections that did not reach significance (MD = -1.3; 95% CI = -4.3 to 1.7).…”
-
82
Mean differences for the post-intervention SPADI.
Published 2024“…Sensitivity analysis excluding studies with high risk of bias showed similar results, with exception of injections that did not reach significance (MD = -1.3; 95% CI = -4.3 to 1.7).…”
-
83
-
84
-
85
Prevalence of significant associations between the pre and post-treatment clinical and ECG/Holter findings in 106 patients with acute Chagas disease acquired by the oral route, Cha...
Published 2023Subjects: “…repolarization abnormalities decreased…”
-
86
-
87
-
88
-
89
-
90
-
91
-
92
-
93
-
94
-
95
APRIL<sup>-/-</sup>/BLyS<sup>-/-</sup> rodents produced significantly less DSA compared to WT.
Published 2022Subjects: -
96
-
97
-
98
Risk of bias summary.
Published 2025“…The observed decrease in body weight could be partially attributed to factors influencing energy balance, as evidenced by the significantly lower mean calorie intake at the end of the intervention (1694.71 kcal/day, 95% CI: 1498.57–1890.85) compared to the baseline intake (2000.64 kcal/day, 95% CI: 1830–2172.98), despite the absence of intentional efforts to restrict energy intake by the participants. …”
-
99
-
100