Search alternatives:
marker decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search), marked increase (Expand Search), markedly decreased (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
n decrease » nn decrease (Expand Search), _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
a marker » _ marker (Expand Search), _ markers (Expand Search)
marker decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search), marked increase (Expand Search), markedly decreased (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
n decrease » nn decrease (Expand Search), _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
a marker » _ marker (Expand Search), _ markers (Expand Search)
-
1
-
2
-
3
Table_2_Maternal oral probiotic use is associated with decreased breastmilk inflammatory markers, infant fecal microbiome variation, and altered recognition memory responses in infants—a pilot observational study.XLSX
Published 2024“…Probiotic use has been proposed as a strategy to promote health via modulation of microbiomes. …”
-
4
Table_1_Maternal oral probiotic use is associated with decreased breastmilk inflammatory markers, infant fecal microbiome variation, and altered recognition memory responses in infants—a pilot observational study.XLSX
Published 2024“…Probiotic use has been proposed as a strategy to promote health via modulation of microbiomes. …”
-
5
-
6
Linear regression analysis.
Published 2025“…</p><p> Conclusion </p><p>The HTRT group showed a greater decrease in HU both pre- and post-treatment, indicating a possible indirect marker of tumor necrosis. …”
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
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. …”
-
12
-
13
-
14
-
15
-
16
-
17
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. …”
-
18
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. …”
-
19
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. …”
-
20
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. …”