Search alternatives:
significant main » significant gap (Expand Search), significant amount (Expand Search), significant cause (Expand Search)
non decrease » point decrease (Expand Search), note decreased (Expand Search), fold decrease (Expand Search)
main biased » male biased (Expand Search), mainly based (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
significant main » significant gap (Expand Search), significant amount (Expand Search), significant cause (Expand Search)
non decrease » point decrease (Expand Search), note decreased (Expand Search), fold decrease (Expand Search)
main biased » male biased (Expand Search), mainly based (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search)
-
141
-
142
-
143
-
144
-
145
-
146
-
147
Apparent Non-Newtonian Behavior of Ionic Liquids
Published 2020“…Depending on the liquid and the rheological conditions, both viscosity increase and decrease have been reported. So far, these variations have been interpreted as a signature of a non-Newtonian behavior. …”
-
148
Data sources for dengue monitoring and prediction depending on the main theme.
Published 2022Subjects: -
149
-
150
-
151
Most significant predictors for the three most frequently studied outcomes.
Published 2022Subjects: -
152
-
153
-
154
-
155
-
156
-
157
Bias risk assessment of included studies.
Published 2025“…<div><p>Background</p><p>The inflammatory response is the main pathophysiological basis of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). …”
-
158
-
159
Annual treatment frequencies in recurrence and non-recurrence groups.
Published 2025“…<p>In the recurrence group, the respective treatment counts for anti-VEGF, STTA, MA-PC, PPV, and total treatments (mean ± standard deviation) in the year before surgery were 3.0 ± 1.4, 0.1 ± 0.3, 0.8 ± 1.0, 0.1 ± 0.3, and 4.0 ± 2.1, respectively. These significantly decreased to 2.3 ± 2.6, 0.1 ± 0.3, 0.8 ± 1.6, 0.0, and 3.1 ± 2.8 in the first year; 2.1 ± 2.8, 0.4 ± 1.0, 0, 0.1 ± 0.3, and 2.6 ± 2.8 in the second year; and 2.0 ± 2.2, 0, 0.6 ± 1.7, 0.1 ± 0.3, and 2.8 ± 3.5 in the third year (Kruskal–Wallis test, p < 0.001; Dunn’s test, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01). …”
-
160