Search alternatives:
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significant non » significant gap (Expand Search), significant amount (Expand Search)
non decrease » nn decrease (Expand Search), point decrease (Expand Search), note decreased (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significant non » significant gap (Expand Search), significant amount (Expand Search)
non decrease » nn decrease (Expand Search), point decrease (Expand Search), note decreased (Expand Search)
-
661
-
662
Forest plot depicting hazard ratios for the development of cardiovascular diseases.
Published 2025Subjects: -
663
-
664
-
665
-
666
-
667
-
668
-
669
-
670
Regression results of the Callaway method.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
671
Regression results of crowding out effects.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
672
Article data.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
673
Overidentification test results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
674
Quantile regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
675
Instrumental variable regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
676
Other robust regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
677
Baseline regression results.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
678
Results of propensity score matching.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
679
Parallel trend test.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”
-
680
Placebo test.
Published 2025“…During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. …”