Search alternatives:
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
0 decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
0 decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
-
11861
Paraquat-induced cell loss is strain dependent.
Published 2012“…<p>(A) After chronic PQ administration, we find that C57BL/6J have a ≈50% decrease in SNpc DA neurons, while SWR have a ≈10% loss of SNpc neurons. …”
-
11862
Maize fertigation with treated sanitary wastewater: growth and yield
Published 2018“…<p></p><p>ABSTRACT We evaluated the growth and yield of maize field, fertigated with different wastewater rates coming from Janaúba sewage treatment plant (Minas Gerais State, Brazil). …”
-
11863
Long-term impact of changing childhood malnutrition on rotavirus diarrhoea: Two decades of adjusted association with climate and socio-demographic factors from urban Bangladesh
Published 2017“…In the adjusted model, a decrease in monthly proportion of underweight [coef.: -0.189 (95% CI:-0.376, -0.003)] and wasting [-0.265 (-0.455, -0.075)] were significantly and inversely associated with rotavirus infection. …”
-
11864
-
11865
-
11866
Temporal Trend in Young-Onset Type 2 Diabetes - the Macrovascular and Mortality Risk: Study of UK Primary Care Electronic Medical Records
Published 2020“…The incidence rates of ASCVD and ACM declined in people aged ≥50 years, but did not decrease in people <50 years. Compared to people aged ≥50 years, those aged 18-39 years at diagnosis had higher obesity (71% obese), higher HbA1c (8.6%), 71% had high LDL-C, while only 18% were on cardio-protective therapy. …”
-
11867
Image 5_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.png
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11868
Image 9_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11869
Image 1_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.jpeg
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11870
Image 2_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11871
Image 8_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11872
Image 7_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11873
Image 10_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11874
Image 4_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11875
Image 6_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11876
Image 3_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
11877
-
11878
-
11879
yorku.forest.October25.2016.csv
Published 2016“…It was hypothesized as the temperature decreases the number of invertebrates found in the forest will decrease. …”
-
11880
Contrast responses under stimulus contrasts distributing in different ranges.
Published 2013“…<i>B</i>: The mean response of the 33 cells to 50% contrast decreased when the mean of the contrast range increased. …”