Search alternatives:
marker decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search), marked increase (Expand Search), markedly decreased (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
means decrease » deaths decreased (Expand Search)
a marker » _ marker (Expand Search), _ markers (Expand Search)
a larger » a large (Expand Search), _ larger (Expand Search), _ large (Expand Search)
marker decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search), marked increase (Expand Search), markedly decreased (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
means decrease » deaths decreased (Expand Search)
a marker » _ marker (Expand Search), _ markers (Expand Search)
a larger » a large (Expand Search), _ larger (Expand Search), _ large (Expand Search)
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
Effects of GJE extract treatment decreased expression of NF-kB p65.
Published 2025“…NF-κB p65 staining was higher in the NF group than controls (0.43 ± 0.11% vs. 0.11 ± 0.05%, <i><i>p</i> </i>< 0.05) and decreased with low and high GJE doses (0.22 ± 0.04% and 0.29 ± 0.10%, respectively, <i><i>p</i> </i>< 0.05), though the high-dose group remained elevated versus controls (0.29 ± 0.10% vs. 0.11 ± 0.05%, <i><i>p</i> </i>< 0.05). …”
-
6
The introduction of mutualisms into assembled communities increases their connectance and complexity while decreasing their richness.
Published 2025“…Parameter values: interaction strengths were drawn from a half-normal distribution of zero mean and a standard deviation of 0.2, and strength for consumers was made no larger than the strength for resources. …”
-
7
Evogliptin attenuates the phenotypic switch of VSMCs during CER treatment by decreasing the osteogenesis-associated genes <i>in-vitro.</i>
Published 2025“…(B, C) Summarized bar graph showed EVO significantly decreased calcium deposition and calcium content in CER treated P<sub>i</sub>-induced VSMCs. …”
-
8
A summary of the included study characteristics.
Published 2025“…There is no significant difference one month after NSPT in diabetic patients (SMD: -5.83, 95%CI: -15.5, 3.83, p = 0.237, I-square, 97.4%, random effects model, n = 2), but three (SMD: -2.44, 95%CI: -3.37, -1.15, p = 0.001, I-square, 75.9%, random effects model, n = 3) and six months (SMD: -2.41, 95%CI: -3.81, -1.01, p = 0.001, I-square, 78.7%, random effects model, n = 2) after the treatment, a significant decrease is observed in the mean GCF visfatin level. …”
-
9
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
-
14
-
15
-
16
List of Included studies.
Published 2025“…There is no significant difference one month after NSPT in diabetic patients (SMD: -5.83, 95%CI: -15.5, 3.83, p = 0.237, I-square, 97.4%, random effects model, n = 2), but three (SMD: -2.44, 95%CI: -3.37, -1.15, p = 0.001, I-square, 75.9%, random effects model, n = 3) and six months (SMD: -2.41, 95%CI: -3.81, -1.01, p = 0.001, I-square, 78.7%, random effects model, n = 2) after the treatment, a significant decrease is observed in the mean GCF visfatin level. …”
-
17
The search strategy in three databases.
Published 2025“…There is no significant difference one month after NSPT in diabetic patients (SMD: -5.83, 95%CI: -15.5, 3.83, p = 0.237, I-square, 97.4%, random effects model, n = 2), but three (SMD: -2.44, 95%CI: -3.37, -1.15, p = 0.001, I-square, 75.9%, random effects model, n = 3) and six months (SMD: -2.41, 95%CI: -3.81, -1.01, p = 0.001, I-square, 78.7%, random effects model, n = 2) after the treatment, a significant decrease is observed in the mean GCF visfatin level. …”
-
18
NIH score.
Published 2025“…There is no significant difference one month after NSPT in diabetic patients (SMD: -5.83, 95%CI: -15.5, 3.83, p = 0.237, I-square, 97.4%, random effects model, n = 2), but three (SMD: -2.44, 95%CI: -3.37, -1.15, p = 0.001, I-square, 75.9%, random effects model, n = 3) and six months (SMD: -2.41, 95%CI: -3.81, -1.01, p = 0.001, I-square, 78.7%, random effects model, n = 2) after the treatment, a significant decrease is observed in the mean GCF visfatin level. …”
-
19
List of excluded studies.
Published 2025“…There is no significant difference one month after NSPT in diabetic patients (SMD: -5.83, 95%CI: -15.5, 3.83, p = 0.237, I-square, 97.4%, random effects model, n = 2), but three (SMD: -2.44, 95%CI: -3.37, -1.15, p = 0.001, I-square, 75.9%, random effects model, n = 3) and six months (SMD: -2.41, 95%CI: -3.81, -1.01, p = 0.001, I-square, 78.7%, random effects model, n = 2) after the treatment, a significant decrease is observed in the mean GCF visfatin level. …”
-
20