Showing 99,261 - 99,280 results of 114,507 for search '(( 12 we decrease ) OR ( 5 ((((we decrease) OR (mean decrease))) OR (a decrease)) ))', query time: 1.69s Refine Results
  1. 99261
  2. 99262
  3. 99263
  4. 99264
  5. 99265
  6. 99266
  7. 99267
  8. 99268

    Image_9_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.TIF by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”
  9. 99269
  10. 99270
  11. 99271

    Table_1_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.docx by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”
  12. 99272

    Image_7_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.TIF by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”
  13. 99273

    Image_6_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.TIF by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”
  14. 99274

    Blood pressure effects of ephedrine treatment. by Daniel Radiloff (588253)

    Published 2014
    “…<p>“Pre-injection” were averaged data −5 to 0 minutes pre injection, “post injection” was averaged −5 to 0 minutes before onset of hypoxia, and “hypoxia” was averaged 30–40 minutes post injection. …”
  15. 99275

    Image_3_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.TIF by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”
  16. 99276

    Image_8_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.TIF by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”
  17. 99277

    Image_1_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.TIF by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”
  18. 99278

    Data_Sheet_1_Big data help to define climate change challenges for the typical Mediterranean species Cistus ladanifer L..docx by Alice Maria Almeida (11596969)

    Published 2023
    “…The potential area of occurrence of the species is equal to 15.8 and 14.1% of the study area for current and LIG conditions, while it decreased to 3.8% in the LGM. The species’ presence diaminished more than half in the RCP 4.5 (to 6.8% in 2050 and 7% in 2070), and a too low figure (2.2%) in the worst-case scenario (RCP 8.5) for 2070. …”
  19. 99279
  20. 99280

    Image_10_Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009–2022.TIF by Xuan Quy Luu (17115106)

    Published 2023
    “…</p>Results<p>The organized screening rate for GC increased from 38.2% in 2009 to 70.8% in 2022, whereas the opportunistic screening rate decreased from 18.8 to 4.5%. Regarding educational inequality, a negative SII value was observed [−3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI), −7.63–0.83%] in organized screening, while a positive SII (9.30%; 95% CI, 6.69–11.91%) and RII (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.59–2.46) were observed in opportunistic screening. …”