Showing 1,661 - 1,680 results of 18,008 for search 'significantly ((((((nn decrease) OR (a decrease))) OR (greatest decrease))) OR (larger decrease))', query time: 0.57s Refine Results
  1. 1661
  2. 1662
  3. 1663
  4. 1664
  5. 1665

    S1 Data - by Hao Deng (409186)

    Published 2024
    “…AA (OR = 3.016) and CA (OR = 2.130) genotypes were identified as risk factors for stage II. ERCC1 significantly decreased in processing of CWP. The cutoff value of ERCC1 was 5.265 pg/ml, with a sensitivity of 90.0% and specificity of 86.7%. …”
  6. 1666

    Change in the genotypes of <i>ATM</i>, <i>ERCC1</i>, and <i>XRCC1</i>. by Hao Deng (409186)

    Published 2024
    “…AA (OR = 3.016) and CA (OR = 2.130) genotypes were identified as risk factors for stage II. ERCC1 significantly decreased in processing of CWP. The cutoff value of ERCC1 was 5.265 pg/ml, with a sensitivity of 90.0% and specificity of 86.7%. …”
  7. 1667
  8. 1668
  9. 1669
  10. 1670

    Data. by Su Hwan Park (15158181)

    Published 2025
    “…Participants in the progression group were younger (60.7 vs. 65.7 years, P = 0.015) and showed a larger BCVA change (0.20 vs. 0.04, P < 0.001) and greater ERM area decrease (34.2% vs. 11.7%, P < 0.001) during the follow-up period. …”
  11. 1671

    Table 1_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  12. 1672

    Table 3_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  13. 1673

    Table 4_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  14. 1674

    Table 8_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  15. 1675

    Table 2_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  16. 1676

    Table 6_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  17. 1677

    Table 5_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  18. 1678

    Table 7_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  19. 1679

    Table 9_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx by Stefanie Wagner (743707)

    Published 2025
    “…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
  20. 1680

    Baseline characteristics of patients. by Su Hwan Park (15158181)

    Published 2025
    “…Participants in the progression group were younger (60.7 vs. 65.7 years, P = 0.015) and showed a larger BCVA change (0.20 vs. 0.04, P < 0.001) and greater ERM area decrease (34.2% vs. 11.7%, P < 0.001) during the follow-up period. …”