Search alternatives:
greater decrease » greatest decrease (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search), greater disease (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
greater decrease » greatest decrease (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search), greater disease (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
-
1961
Data Sheet 1_Metabolic adaptation fluctuates with different prediction equations: a secondary analysis based on a weight-loss clinical trial.docx
Published 2025“…Both Katch-McArdle-determined RMR and BIA-determined RMR presented a significant decrease between baseline and the end of the intervention (week 16). …”
-
1962
Data Sheet 1_Effect of a high dose atorvastatin as adjuvant therapy to mesalamine in attenuating inflammation and symptoms in patients with ulcerative colitis: a randomized control...
Published 2025“…A clinical response was defined as a decline in the rectal bleeding sub score of at least one point, and a decrease in PMS of at least two points. Clinical remission was defined as a PMS of less than 2 and the absence of any single sub score greater than 1.…”
-
1963
Integrating legumes into cropping systems enhances soil carbon and nitrogen content while reduces the soil carbon-to-nitrogen ratio: A global meta-analysis
Published 2025“…Moreover, SOC and STN increased when legumes replaced fallow or gramineous soil, whereas SCN significantly decreased only when legumes replaced gramineous systems. …”
-
1964
Table 1_Association of spicy food consumption with colorectal polyp and adenoma prevalence: findings from the Lanxi Pre-Colorectal Cancer Cohort (LP3C).docx
Published 2025“…Restricted cubic spline modeling revealed a non-linear relationship between spicy food intake and polyp risk (P for non-linearity < 0.001), characterized by initial risk elevation followed by a slight decrease with increasing consumption levels. …”
-
1965
Penguin ease of transport for real vs. fully-compensated travel vectors relative to the ground during the return journey with respect to depth use and prey acquisition.
Published 2025“…Higher values indicate greater energy efficiency of movement. Significant pairwise differences (<i>p</i> < 0.05) between the real and fully-compensated vectors are marked with solid triangles at 0.05 intervals of the return journey, based on GAM-predicted ease of transport values, which account for individual variability and smooth trends over distance (see e <a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002981#pbio.3002981.s003" target="_blank">S3 Text</a> for details details). …”
-
1966
Table_1_Decoding diets: insights on ultra-processed food consumption among Lebanese adults from the updated LEBANese natiONal food consumption survey (LEBANON-FCS).DOCX
Published 2024“…In comparison to the minimally processed diet fraction, the UPF diet fraction was found to have considerably greater levels of sodium and thiamin and lower levels of proteins, fiber, and essential vitamins and minerals. …”
-
1967
Analyzing the chemical environment of bent bamboo (<i>Phyllostachys iridescens</i>) sections using XRD, XPS, and FTIR analysis
Published 2025“…This indicates that VW undergoes more significant degradation of cellulose and hemicelluloses, while CW experiences a greater loss of extracts. …”
-
1968
Data_.xlsx
Published 2024“…Additionally, the asymmetry score exhibited a moderate decrease (∆46.96%, ES=0.64). In contrast, no significant changes were observed in the CG across all fitness measures. …”
-
1969
Table 1_Sex-specific association between triglyceride-glucose index and all-cause mortality in patients with osteoporotic fractures: a retrospective cohort study.docx
Published 2025“…However, in males, there was a non-linear correlation, where patients in the uppermost TyG-I tertile showed a substantially decreased mortality risk relative to those in the lowest tertile (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.30–0.92, p = 0.02). …”
-
1970
Supplementary file 1_Sex-specific association between triglyceride-glucose index and all-cause mortality in patients with osteoporotic fractures: a retrospective cohort study.xlsx
Published 2025“…However, in males, there was a non-linear correlation, where patients in the uppermost TyG-I tertile showed a substantially decreased mortality risk relative to those in the lowest tertile (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.30–0.92, p = 0.02). …”
-
1971
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). …”
-
1972
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). …”
-
1973
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). …”
-
1974
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). …”
-
1975
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). …”
-
1976
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). …”
-
1977
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). …”
-
1978
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). …”
-
1979
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). …”
-
1980
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). …”