Search alternatives:
point decrease » point increase (Expand Search)
ppm decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search), pa decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
point decrease » point increase (Expand Search)
ppm decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search), pa decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
-
19921
-
19922
HFD induced oxidative stress, and decreased ATP levels in skeletal muscle and liver.
Published 2013“…<p>(A) the GSH/GSSG ratio was significantly decreased in both gastrocnemius muscle and liver samples isolated from mice fed a HFD. …”
-
19923
-
19924
-
19925
-
19926
-
19927
-
19928
-
19929
Dextroamphetamine significantly decreases time to emergence from propofol anesthesia, but atomoxetine does not.
Published 2015“…Dextroamphetamine caused a statistically significant decrease in time to emergence compared to normal saline, whereas atomoxetine did not.…”
-
19930
-
19931
-
19932
-
19933
Regression results of the Callaway method.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
19934
Regression results of crowding out effects.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
19935
Article data.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
19936
Overidentification test results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
19937
Quantile regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
19938
Instrumental variable regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
19939
Other robust regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
19940
Baseline regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”