Search alternatives:
changes decrease » change increases (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
significant c » significant co (Expand Search), significant _ (Expand Search), significant i (Expand Search)
c decreased » _ decreased (Expand Search), a decreased (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
changes decrease » change increases (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
significant c » significant co (Expand Search), significant _ (Expand Search), significant i (Expand Search)
c decreased » _ decreased (Expand Search), a decreased (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
-
1
MS decreases the larger amplitude distribution in adult rats.
Published 2023Subjects: “…glutamatergic events decreased…”
-
2
-
3
Top 20 genes with significantly decreased abundance in Aco<sup>R</sup> cells.
Published 2021Subjects: -
4
-
5
Synaptopathy at IHC-SGN synapses decreases the peak of the CAP significantly, without changes to peak latency and width.
Published 2021“…(B) Comparison of CAP measures of synaptopathy cases relative to normal (no synaptopathy) at 70 dB SPL (*p<0.05, **p<0.01, #p<0.001). (C) Normalized CAP amplitudes exhibited an exponential increase and the decreases in CAP amplitudes of populations with both synaptopathy scenarios were more pronounced for higher sound levels. …”
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
The carotid canal area is larger on the unaffected side than on the affected side in patients with unilateral moyamoya disease, but the difference decreases according to the contra...
Published 2021“…(C) shows a representative case of contralateral progression of unilateral moyamoya disease. …”
-
12
-
13
Spatial information is significantly decreased in dCA1 and vCA1 in APP/PS1 mice.
Published 2024“…The spatial information in dCA1 was significantly larger than circularly shuffled spike trains with similar mean firing rates for C57BL/6 mice (mean ± std: empirical = 0.132 ± 0.048, shuffled = 0.124 ± 0.035, p < 0.001, two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test, n<sub>empirical</sub> = 305 units from 5 recording sessions, n<sub>shuffled</sub> = 30500 simulated units from 5 recording sessions), but not for APP/PS1 mice (mean ± std: empirical = 0.128 ± 0.051, shuffled = 0.123 ± .047, p = 0.39, two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test, n<sub>empirical</sub> = 180 units from 4 recording sessions, n<sub>shuffled</sub> = 18000 simulated units from 4 recording sessions). …”
-
14
-
15
-
16
-
17
-
18
-
19
-
20