Search alternatives:
greatest decrease » treatment decreased (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search)
shape decrease » shape increases (Expand Search), step decrease (Expand Search), showed decreased (Expand Search)
small decrease » small increased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
greatest decrease » treatment decreased (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search)
shape decrease » shape increases (Expand Search), step decrease (Expand Search), showed decreased (Expand Search)
small decrease » small increased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
-
7321
Network plot for VSS score.
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%).…”
-
7322
Network plot for scar thickness.
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%).…”
-
7323
Funnel plot for VSS score.
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%).…”
-
7324
Characteristics of the included trials (n = 17).
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%).…”
-
7325
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%).…”
-
7326
Network plot for VAS score.
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%).…”
-
7327
Funnel plot for VAS score.
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%).…”
-
7328
-
7329
-
7330
Image 3_Quantifying the split-elbow sign: a comprehensive study in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.tif
Published 2024“…Furthermore, there was a notable decrease in SEI<sub>MUNIX</sub> values as the disease progressed (p < 0.001). …”
-
7331
Image 4_Quantifying the split-elbow sign: a comprehensive study in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.tif
Published 2024“…Furthermore, there was a notable decrease in SEI<sub>MUNIX</sub> values as the disease progressed (p < 0.001). …”
-
7332
Image 2_Quantifying the split-elbow sign: a comprehensive study in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.tif
Published 2024“…Furthermore, there was a notable decrease in SEI<sub>MUNIX</sub> values as the disease progressed (p < 0.001). …”
-
7333
Image 1_Quantifying the split-elbow sign: a comprehensive study in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.tif
Published 2024“…Furthermore, there was a notable decrease in SEI<sub>MUNIX</sub> values as the disease progressed (p < 0.001). …”
-
7334
-
7335
-
7336
Epidural Hydromorphone for Postpartum Pain Management After Vaginal Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Published 2025“…</p><p dir="ltr"><b>Key Points</b></p><p dir="ltr"><b>Question</b></p><p dir="ltr">In women post-vaginal delivery, does the administration of epidural hydromorphone offer superior analgesia and enhance maternal satisfaction relative to a placebo (normal saline)?</p><p><br></p><p dir="ltr"><b>Findings</b></p><p dir="ltr">Epidural hydromorphone demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in postpartum pain scores, a decreased requirement for supplemental analgesics, and enhanced maternal satisfaction. …”
-
7337
Variability in performance and response to task dynamics.
Published 2025“…(E) When focusing on five consecutive successful trials, WT mice showed a significant reduction in trajectory variability, whereas zQ175 mice exhibited only a slight decrease, predominantly in the last trial, hinting at genotype-specific differences in optimizing performance following success (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.746 F(1, 22) = 0.1074, trial p = 0.012 F(2.836, 62.38) = 4.045, interaction p = 0.018 F(3, 66) = 3.561). …”
-
7338
-
7339
-
7340