Search alternatives:
largest decrease » largest decreases (Expand Search), larger decrease (Expand Search), marked decrease (Expand Search)
marker decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search), larger decrease (Expand Search), marked increase (Expand Search)
a largest » _ largest (Expand Search), a large (Expand Search), a latest (Expand Search)
a marker » _ marker (Expand Search), _ markers (Expand Search)
largest decrease » largest decreases (Expand Search), larger decrease (Expand Search), marked decrease (Expand Search)
marker decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search), larger decrease (Expand Search), marked increase (Expand Search)
a largest » _ largest (Expand Search), a large (Expand Search), a latest (Expand Search)
a marker » _ marker (Expand Search), _ markers (Expand Search)
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
Global temperature anomaly is unaffected by low network degree at a high number of group messages.
Published 2025“…<p>Parameter plane showing the changes in (a) rejector population and (b) temperature anomaly due to the variation in the average number of messages transmitted per group () and the average degree of the network (<i>k</i>). …”
-
12
-
13
-
14
-
15
-
16
Effect (<i>D</i>) of the intervention within demographic subgroups by race and ethnicity for 8 outcome measures, adjusting for pretest values, gender, and degree.
Published 2024“…Regression models controlled for the pre-intervention value of the outcome variable (excluding Self-assessed change in vitality), gender, URM, and degree, and included an interaction term between URM and intervention to assess for potential differences in intervention effects between URM and non-URM faculty subgroups.…”
-
17
Datasheet1_Different profiles of lipoprotein particles associate various degrees of cardiac involvement in adolescents with morbid obesity.pdf
Published 2022“…</p>Results<p>The three cardiac involvement groups showed significant increases in HOMA-IR, inflammatory markers and ALT ratio LDL-P/HDL-P (40.0 vs. 43.9 vs. 47.1, p 0.012). When only cardiac change groups were considered, differences in small LDL-P (565.0 vs. 625.1 nmol/L, p 0.070), VLDL size and GlycA demonstrated better utility than just traditional risk factors to predict which subjects could present severe LV changes [AUC: 0.79 (95% CI: 0.54–1)]. …”
-
18
-
19
-
20