Table 2_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx by MengLan Zhu (20517257)

“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”

Table 5_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx by MengLan Zhu (20517257)

“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”

Table 3_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx by MengLan Zhu (20517257)

“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”

Image 1_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.png by MengLan Zhu (20517257)

“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”

Table 1_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx by MengLan Zhu (20517257)

“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”

Table 4_Global burden and trends of norovirus-associated diseases from 1990 to 2021 an observational trend study.xlsx by MengLan Zhu (20517257)

“…For trend analysis, we employed annual percentage change (EAPC) through linear regression and applied Joinpoint analysis to identify significant changes over time. …”

Supplementary Material for: A retrospective analysis of the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) at The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre (TOHCC) over t... by Alrehaili M. (19737907)

“…Despite endoscopy closures and disruption of some diagnostic services during the pandemic, cases of GEP-NETs for all stages did not decrease.…”

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... by Huan Chen (6545)

“…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]. …”

Data_Sheet_1_Optimizing residue return with soil moisture and nutrient stoichiometry reduced greenhouse gas fluxes in Alfisols.PDF by Dharmendra Singh (572349)

“…A significant decrease in CH₄ emission by ca. 46% in most RR treatments was observed in 100% FC compared with the R0. …”

Image 5_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.png by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 9_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 1_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.jpeg by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 2_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 8_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 7_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 10_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 4_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 6_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

Image 3_Unexpected estradiol decline during ovarian stimulation monitoring affects cumulative live birth.tiff by Haixiao Chen (12565087)

“…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). …”

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 by Monica L. Quijano-Lievano (22808537)

“…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).…”