Search alternatives:
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significantly mean » significantly less (Expand Search), significantly mediate (Expand Search), significantly impact (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
significantly mean » significantly less (Expand Search), significantly mediate (Expand Search), significantly impact (Expand Search)
-
1921
Complexity comparison results.
Published 2025“…Evaluation on the ScanNetV2 multi-view 3D object detection dataset demonstrates that ImVoxelGNet achieves a performance improvement of up to 2.2% in mean average precision (mAP). This improvement effectively demonstrates the efficacy of our method in significantly enhancing 3D object detection performance through improved geometric perception and comprehensive scene understanding. …”
-
1922
Ablation results on Nerf-Det [28].
Published 2025“…Evaluation on the ScanNetV2 multi-view 3D object detection dataset demonstrates that ImVoxelGNet achieves a performance improvement of up to 2.2% in mean average precision (mAP). This improvement effectively demonstrates the efficacy of our method in significantly enhancing 3D object detection performance through improved geometric perception and comprehensive scene understanding. …”
-
1923
Ablation results on noise.
Published 2025“…Evaluation on the ScanNetV2 multi-view 3D object detection dataset demonstrates that ImVoxelGNet achieves a performance improvement of up to 2.2% in mean average precision (mAP). This improvement effectively demonstrates the efficacy of our method in significantly enhancing 3D object detection performance through improved geometric perception and comprehensive scene understanding. …”
-
1924
-
1925
-
1926
-
1927
-
1928
-
1929
-
1930
-
1931
-
1932
Search strategy.
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1933
Fig 1 -
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1934
GMT by age cohort for PWH and PWoH.
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1935
Fig 4 -
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1936
Difference in GMT for HPV16 and HPV18 in PWH.
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1937
Fig 3 -
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1938
Summary of characteristics of studies reviewed.
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1939
Cumulative meta-analysis.
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”
-
1940
Summary of immunogenicity information.
Published 2024“…GMT results of HPV16 and HPV18 genotypes were significantly lower in PWH; Hedges’s g -0.434 (95% CI: -0.823, -0.046) and Hedges’s g -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72, -0.43), respectively. …”