Search alternatives:
significantly lower » significantly higher (Expand Search)
lower decrease » larger decrease (Expand Search), linear decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
sizes decrease » scores decreased (Expand Search), rivers decreased (Expand Search)
bias decrease » bias increases (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
significantly lower » significantly higher (Expand Search)
lower decrease » larger decrease (Expand Search), linear decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
sizes decrease » scores decreased (Expand Search), rivers decreased (Expand Search)
bias decrease » bias increases (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search)
-
1
-
2
Risk of bias summary.
Published 2025“…The observed decrease in body weight could be partially attributed to factors influencing energy balance, as evidenced by the significantly lower mean calorie intake at the end of the intervention (1694.71 kcal/day, 95% CI: 1498.57–1890.85) compared to the baseline intake (2000.64 kcal/day, 95% CI: 1830–2172.98), despite the absence of intentional efforts to restrict energy intake by the participants. …”
-
3
-
4
-
5
Box plot show that there are no differences between different groups of the size of pus cavity.
Published 2024Subjects: -
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
Risk of bias graph.
Published 2025“…The treatment ranking revealed that massage therapy demonstrated the most significant efficacy in reducing Vancouver Scar Scale score (surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA] = 89.0%), CO<sub>2</sub> laser therapy exhibited the highest efficacy in decreasing scar thickness (SUCRA = 96.8%), and extracorporeal shock wave therapy + routine treatment showed the most significant efficacy in reducing Visual Analogue Scale score (SUCRA = 58.6%).…”
-
14
-
15
-
16
-
17
-
18
-
19
-
20
Sample size characteristics.
Published 2025“…On the contrary, the likelihood of weighing a child at birth decreases with parity.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>The study highlights the need to target pregnant women of lower socioeconomic status for interventions aimed at averting severe morbidity and mortality occasioned by conditions of low birthweight.…”