Search alternatives:
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
lower decrease » teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search), showed decreased (Expand Search)
larger decrease » marked decrease (Expand Search)
linear decrease » linear increase (Expand Search)
lower decrease » teer decrease (Expand Search), we decrease (Expand Search), showed decreased (Expand Search)
-
1941
-
1942
-
1943
-
1944
Descriptive statistics and variable definitions.
Published 2024“…The findings indicate that consumption inequality has a significant negative impact on SWB. Specifically, for every unit increase in consumption inequality, the probability of individuals rating their SWB as “Happy” and “Very happy” decreases by 0.37% and 5.45% respectively. …”
-
1945
The results of endogenous analysis.
Published 2024“…The findings indicate that consumption inequality has a significant negative impact on SWB. Specifically, for every unit increase in consumption inequality, the probability of individuals rating their SWB as “Happy” and “Very happy” decreases by 0.37% and 5.45% respectively. …”
-
1946
Correlation test.
Published 2024“…The findings indicate that consumption inequality has a significant negative impact on SWB. Specifically, for every unit increase in consumption inequality, the probability of individuals rating their SWB as “Happy” and “Very happy” decreases by 0.37% and 5.45% respectively. …”
-
1947
S1 Dataset -
Published 2024“…The findings indicate that consumption inequality has a significant negative impact on SWB. Specifically, for every unit increase in consumption inequality, the probability of individuals rating their SWB as “Happy” and “Very happy” decreases by 0.37% and 5.45% respectively. …”
-
1948
The mediation of confidence.
Published 2024“…The findings indicate that consumption inequality has a significant negative impact on SWB. Specifically, for every unit increase in consumption inequality, the probability of individuals rating their SWB as “Happy” and “Very happy” decreases by 0.37% and 5.45% respectively. …”
-
1949
Robustness test.
Published 2024“…The findings indicate that consumption inequality has a significant negative impact on SWB. Specifically, for every unit increase in consumption inequality, the probability of individuals rating their SWB as “Happy” and “Very happy” decreases by 0.37% and 5.45% respectively. …”
-
1950
The effects of consumption inequality on SWB.
Published 2024“…The findings indicate that consumption inequality has a significant negative impact on SWB. Specifically, for every unit increase in consumption inequality, the probability of individuals rating their SWB as “Happy” and “Very happy” decreases by 0.37% and 5.45% respectively. …”
-
1951
-
1952
Baseline characteristics.
Published 2025“…However, the body fat mass (BFM) and body mass index (BMI) decreased significantly in the ST group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). …”
-
1953
Data ste.
Published 2025“…However, the body fat mass (BFM) and body mass index (BMI) decreased significantly in the ST group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). …”
-
1954
Comparison of post-experimental outcome measures.
Published 2025“…However, the body fat mass (BFM) and body mass index (BMI) decreased significantly in the ST group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). …”
-
1955
-
1956
-
1957
-
1958
-
1959
S1 File -
Published 2025“…</p><p>Results</p><p>Participants had significantly lower odds (AOR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.12–0.65) of reporting difficulty in accessing syringes later in the pandemic. …”
-
1960
Chicago COVID-19 mitigation policy timeline.
Published 2025“…</p><p>Results</p><p>Participants had significantly lower odds (AOR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.12–0.65) of reporting difficulty in accessing syringes later in the pandemic. …”