Search alternatives:
significant effect » significant impact (Expand Search)
longer decrease » linear decrease (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
significant effect » significant impact (Expand Search)
longer decrease » linear decrease (Expand Search), largest decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
-
121
-
122
-
123
Experimental results of different parameters k in K-Means algorithm for repeatability.
Published 2025Subjects: -
124
-
125
-
126
Effects of MC treatment on symptoms and histological changes in DNBS-induced colitis rats.
Published 2025Subjects: -
127
Variation in repeat abundance across individuals.
Published 2023“…Points represent raw data, while regression lines and error bars represent the least squares mean from a mixed effect model that accounts for relatedness. Relationships shown for a subset of significant (p<0.05) predictors.…”
-
128
-
129
-
130
-
131
-
132
-
133
-
134
EFFECT OF TRAINING ON THE REPEATED SPRINTS ABILITY IN BASKETBALL ATHLETES: INDIVIDUAL OR TEAM STATISTICS?
Published 2019“…<p></p><p>ABSTRACT The aim of the present study was verify the chronic training effect on the repeated sprints ability (RSA) in basketball athlete and later, compare the individual’s statistics with those of the team. …”
-
135
Adult rat ultrasonic vocalizations and reward: effects of propranolol and repeated cocaine administration
Published 2024“…Here, we investigated the effects of acute and repeated cocaine administration, and—based on previous findings with amphetamine—their possible dependence on beta?…”
-
136
-
137
Multivariate and within group effects.
Published 2024“…Analyses of variance at each time point across conditions and for the percent change elicited by each intervention were conducted to determine significant differences (p < 0.05).</p><p>Results</p><p>Repeated-measures ANOVA revealed a significant difference between mean percent difference of sit-and-reach score for FR (8.8 ± 0.5%) compared to DWU and PM (p = 0.046 and 0.048, respectively) while DWU (6.3 ± 0.8%) and PM (6.8 ± 0.5%) did not differ (p = 0.717). …”
-
138
-
139
-
140