Search alternatives:
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
teer decrease » mean decrease (Expand Search), greater decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
teer decrease » mean decrease (Expand Search), greater decrease (Expand Search)
nn decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), mean decrease (Expand Search), gy decreased (Expand Search)
a decrease » _ decrease (Expand Search), _ decreased (Expand Search), _ decreases (Expand Search)
-
1561
-
1562
-
1563
S1 Data -
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%. …”
-
1564
Change in the genotypes of <i>ATM</i>, <i>ERCC1</i>, and <i>XRCC1</i>.
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%. …”
-
1565
-
1566
-
1567
-
1568
Data.
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. …”
-
1569
Table 1_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1570
Table 3_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1571
Table 4_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1572
Table 8_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1573
Table 2_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1574
Table 6_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1575
Table 5_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1576
Table 7_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1577
Table 9_Absolute abundance calculation enhances the significance of microbiome data in antibiotic treatment studies.xlsx
Published 2025“…Here, GCN correction additionally uncovered significant decreases of Lactobacillus and Faecalibacterium. …”
-
1578
Baseline characteristics of patients.
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. …”
-
1579
-
1580