Showing 1 - 20 results of 5,398 for search '(( ai large decrease ) OR ((( _ greatest decrease ) OR ( a ((web decrease) OR (mean decrease)) ))))', query time: 0.49s Refine Results
  1. 1

    Differentially expressed genes (DEGs)<sup>a</sup> showing the greatest fold changes from each potato tissue: 10 with greatest increase in expression and 10 with greatest decrease in expression. by Margaret A. Carpenter (6104180)

    Published 2025
    “…<p>Differentially expressed genes (DEGs)<sup>a</sup> showing the greatest fold changes from each potato tissue: 10 with greatest increase in expression and 10 with greatest decrease in expression.…”
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5

    A summary of the included study characteristics. by Zahra Tajik (20752452)

    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. …”
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8

    Data Sheet 1_Emotional prompting amplifies disinformation generation in AI large language models.docx by Rasita Vinay (21006911)

    Published 2025
    “…Introduction<p>The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) large language models (LLMs), which can produce text that closely resembles human-written content, presents both opportunities and risks. …”
  9. 9

    List of Included studies. by Zahra Tajik (20752452)

    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. …”
  10. 10

    The search strategy in three databases. by Zahra Tajik (20752452)

    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. …”
  11. 11

    NIH score. by Zahra Tajik (20752452)

    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. 12

    List of excluded studies. by Zahra Tajik (20752452)

    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. …”
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15

    Marginal means – Pooled across scenarios. by Mehdi Mourali (10170245)

    Published 2025
    “…A randomized conjoint experiment and a follow-up choice experiment revealed that support for the EIAs decreased sharply as their accuracy gap grew, although impact parity was prioritized more when ETAs produced large outcome discrepancies. …”
  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18
  19. 19
  20. 20