Showing 4,081 - 4,100 results of 7,089 for search 'significantly ((((lower decrease) OR (((mean decrease) OR (nn decrease))))) OR (linear decrease))', query time: 0.56s Refine Results
  1. 4081

    Validation and predictive accuracy of the cerebrovascular model, by Hadi Esfandi (21387211)

    Published 2025
    “…This observation suggests that the myogenic response is potentially linearly potentiated with increasing WT; however, the decreased constriction ability of muscles in the sloped phase, is proven to be advantageous for the vasculature, as it prevents reduced blood flow in deeper layers at high ABNP values. …”
  2. 4082

    Variability in performance and response to task dynamics. by Daniel Ramandi (10047543)

    Published 2025
    “…(E) When focusing on five consecutive successful trials, WT mice showed a significant reduction in trajectory variability, whereas zQ175 mice exhibited only a slight decrease, predominantly in the last trial, hinting at genotype-specific differences in optimizing performance following success (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.746 F(1, 22) = 0.1074, trial p = 0.012 F(2.836, 62.38) = 4.045, interaction p = 0.018 F(3, 66) = 3.561). …”
  3. 4083

    European study sites. by Graeme T. Swindles (7192745)

    Published 2025
    “…We find that summer temperature is a significant climatic control on aPAR across our European sites. …”
  4. 4084

    Location of study sites. by Graeme T. Swindles (7192745)

    Published 2025
    “…We find that summer temperature is a significant climatic control on aPAR across our European sites. …”
  5. 4085

    Modulation of performance during learning. by Daniel Ramandi (10047543)

    Published 2025
    “…(B) A longitudinal comparison of the average exponential fit weight between WT and zQ175 mice reveals that while WT mice show a decreasing trend, indicating a shift towards longer duration (“timed”) trials, zQ175 mice maintain a consistently high exponential weight, demonstrating no significant change over time (b; RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.0106 F(1, 22) = 7.795, days p < 0.0001 F(5.262, 115.4) = 7.616, interaction p < 0.0001 F(57, 1250) = 2.834). …”
  6. 4086
  7. 4087

    Changes in cytokine production over the second week of culture. by Nils Ågren (21474419)

    Published 2025
    “…The decrease in IFN-γ production between days 9 and 14 was significant in all groups. …”
  8. 4088

    Deleting liver-innervating cholinergic neurons induces beiging of ingWAT. by Jiyeon Hwang (19747297)

    Published 2024
    “…(C, D) Plots showing the distribution of the average adipocyte size (left panel). Right panel: The mean cell area was significantly smaller in the experimental groups than in controls (control, <i>n</i> = 4 mice; experimental, <i>n</i> = 5 mice, unpaired <i>t</i> test, *<i>p</i> < 0.05). …”
  9. 4089
  10. 4090
  11. 4091
  12. 4092

    The percentage of studies that resulted in insect death increased over time. by Craig D. Perl (3326880)

    Published 2025
    “…There was a significant decrease in the proportion of studies reporting just invasive handling (without death) over time (linear regression; t<sub>20,18</sub> = 4.00, p = 0.001, R<sup>2 </sup>= 0.44). …”
  13. 4093

    Activation of the RSC-ACC projections causes mechanical and thermal pain sensitization. by Shun Hao (11848871)

    Published 2025
    “…CNO in hM3Dq group, **<i>p</i> = 0.0021 < 0.01, <i>n =</i> 9 mice). ns means no significant difference. Error bars indicate SEM. …”
  14. 4094
  15. 4095

    Basic information of the participants. by Jincheng Huang (9306806)

    Published 2024
    “…The scores of deformity of Stahl’s ear were lower than those of others after follow-up (P < 0.05). …”
  16. 4096
  17. 4097
  18. 4098
  19. 4099
  20. 4100

    Complementary conditioning measures in healthy subjects. by Gabriela Ribeiro (4748373)

    Published 2024
    “…<b>(I) Novelty</b> ratings significantly decreased from pre to post-conditioning (F<sub>(1,51)</sub> = 10.2, <i>P</i> = 0.002; post hoc CS<sup>-</sup>, <i>P</i> = 0.0001; post hoc CS<sup>+</sup>, <i>P</i> = 0.01) but similarly for both stimuli (F<sub>(1, 51)</sub> = 0.17, <i>P</i> = 0.7; Interaction: F<sub>(1, 51)</sub> = 1.1, <i>P</i> = 0.3). …”