Search alternatives:
significant reductions » significant reduction (Expand Search), significant predictors (Expand Search), significant predictor (Expand Search)
reductions groups » education groups (Expand Search), predictions grouped (Expand Search), educational groups (Expand Search)
marked decrease » marked increase (Expand Search)
significant reductions » significant reduction (Expand Search), significant predictors (Expand Search), significant predictor (Expand Search)
reductions groups » education groups (Expand Search), predictions grouped (Expand Search), educational groups (Expand Search)
marked decrease » marked increase (Expand Search)
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
Change in Watt’s Connectedness Scale (WCS), General Connectedness by Treatment Group.
Published 2025Subjects: -
14
-
15
-
16
Data_Sheet_1_Immune and Neuroendocrine Trait and State Markers in Psychotic Illness: Decreased Kynurenines Marking Psychotic Exacerbations.docx
Published 2020“…</p><p>Conclusion: The acute psychotic state is marked by state-specific increases of immune markers and decreases in peripheral IDO pathway markers. …”
-
17
-
18
-
19
Results of a meta-analysis of the surgery risk factors: A: Number of implants: there was no significant difference in number of implants between two groups (1 vs > 1); B: Reduction: there was significant difference in reduction between two groups (reduction vs no reduction); C: Reduction method: there was significant difference in reduction method between two groups (closed vs open); D: Delayed surgery: there was no significant difference in delayed surgery between two groups (≤24h vs > 24h); E: Capsular decompression: there was no significant difference in capsular decompression between two groups (decompression vs no decompression).
Published 2025“…<p>Results of a meta-analysis of the surgery risk factors: A: Number of implants: there was no significant difference in number of implants between two groups (1 vs > 1); B: Reduction: there was significant difference in reduction between two groups (reduction vs no reduction); C: Reduction method: there was significant difference in reduction method between two groups (closed vs open); D: Delayed surgery: there was no significant difference in delayed surgery between two groups (≤24h vs > 24h); E: Capsular decompression: there was no significant difference in capsular decompression between two groups (decompression vs no decompression).…”
-
20