Search alternatives:
significant initial » significant spatial (Expand Search), significant intra (Expand Search), significant financial (Expand Search)
initial increase » unit increase (Expand Search)
mean decrease » a decrease (Expand Search)
gap decrease » a decrease (Expand Search), gain decreased (Expand Search), step decrease (Expand Search)
significant initial » significant spatial (Expand Search), significant intra (Expand Search), significant financial (Expand Search)
initial increase » unit increase (Expand Search)
mean decrease » a decrease (Expand Search)
gap decrease » a decrease (Expand Search), gain decreased (Expand Search), step decrease (Expand Search)
-
21
Change in Mean Anxiety Scores Over time by group.
Published 2025“…There was a trend of increased recall rates in group 2 for short-term problems, long-term problems, intervention, and incidence rates, but it did not reach statistically significant level. There was an overall decrease in State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) scores of participants after counseling (p = 0.002) but no statistically difference in change of STAI scores between the two groups (p = 0.981).…”
-
22
-
23
Socio-demographic characteristics of women in study sample (means except as noted).
Published 2025Subjects: -
24
-
25
Between-groups comparison of GIN and PPI values in control, tinnitus and PBMT groups.
Published 2024Subjects: -
26
-
27
-
28
-
29
-
30
-
31
Between groups comparison of BTT and threshold in control, tinnitus and PBMT groups.
Published 2024Subjects: -
32
-
33
-
34
-
35
Distribution of non-pharmacological treatment related to insomnia disorder (2002–2019).
Published 2025Subjects: -
36
-
37
General information of patient who diagnosis insomnia disorder (N = 518,119).
Published 2025Subjects: -
38
Detailed treatment status of people who received non- pharmacological treatment at first diagnosis.
Published 2025Subjects: -
39
-
40
Marginal means – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…When are individuals more likely to support equal treatment algorithms (ETAs), characterized by higher predictive accuracy, and when do they prefer equal impact algorithms (EIAs) that reduce performance gaps between groups? 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. …”