Search alternatives:
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
lower decrease » teer decrease (Expand Search), showed decreased (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
lower decrease » teer decrease (Expand Search), showed decreased (Expand Search)
we decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), a decrease (Expand Search), nn decrease (Expand Search)
-
3861
Table 5_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx
Published 2025“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”
-
3862
Table 3_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx
Published 2025“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”
-
3863
Image 1_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.png
Published 2025“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”
-
3864
Table 1_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx
Published 2025“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”
-
3865
Table 4_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx
Published 2025“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”
-
3866
<b>The moderating effect of financial literacy on risk preferences and time preferences</b>
Published 2025“…Additionally, the study concluded that time preferences significantly moderate financial literacy. An increase in financial literacy is associated with a decrease in time preferences, indicating that as financial literacy rises, subjects become more patient. …”
-
3867
Supplementary Material for: A retrospective analysis of the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) at The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre (TOHCC) over t...
Published 2024“…Despite endoscopy closures and disruption of some diagnostic services during the pandemic, cases of GEP-NETs for all stages did not decrease.…”
-
3868
Table 1_Linking the Planetary Health Diet Index to sarcopenia: the mediating effect of the non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (N...
Published 2025“…Analysis of the dose–response curve suggested a linear relationship between PHDI and sarcopenia. Furthermore, a significant positive association was identified between NHHR and sarcopenia [OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.16], with NHHR found to decrease as PHDI increased [beta coefficient (β) = −0.09, 95% CI: −0.11, −0.06]. …”
-
3869
Data_Sheet_1_Optimizing residue return with soil moisture and nutrient stoichiometry reduced greenhouse gas fluxes in Alfisols.PDF
Published 2024“…A significant decrease in CH<sub>4</sub> emission by ca. 46% in most RR treatments was observed in 100% FC compared with the R0. …”
-
3870
Image 5_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.png
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3871
Image 9_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3872
Image 1_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.jpeg
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3873
Image 2_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3874
Image 8_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3875
Image 7_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3876
Image 10_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3877
Image 4_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3878
Image 6_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3879
Image 3_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff
Published 2025“…In both unmatched and matched cohorts, the CLBRs were significantly decreased (unmatched cohort: 66.3% versus 55%, P<0.001, adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.76,0.91; matched cohort: 59% versus 55%, P = 0.003, adjusted OR 0.84, 95%CI: 0.75,0.94). …”
-
3880
Data Sheet 1_Impact of implementing a pediatric early warning system on outcomes in hematopoietic stem cell transplant units in South America and Europe.docx
Published 2025“…There was a non-significant decrease in clinical deterioration event mortality post-PEWS implementation (24%, n = 17/71 vs. 15%, n = 22/150, p = 0.1335).…”