The phrase "augmentation was more" is not correct as it is incomplete and lacks context.
It could be used in a sentence discussing the comparative degree of augmentation in a specific context, but it needs additional information to be meaningful.
Example: "In the study, the results showed that augmentation was more effective than the previous methods used."
Alternatives: "augmentation was greater" or "augmentation was superior".
Among all study cohorts, augmentation was the least common event, although augmentation was more common among DPP-4i initiators.
Fehring et al. reported that wedge-shaped augmentation was more favorable than block-shaped augmentation for bone stock preservation, although blocks were more advantageous for load bearing because they allowed for a planar bone-implant interface [ 26].
As an augmentor to medications, results indicate that MBCT has similar efficacy to CBT [ 12, 13]., MBCT augmentation was more efficacious than antidepressant management alone in reducing the residual symptoms of chronic depression [ 14, 15] and improved outcomes in dysthymia compared to imipramine monotreatment [ 16].
In the review's subgroup of balloon catheter vs. prostaglandins (23 studies, 3474 women) Caesarean Section, instrumental delivery rates and vaginal delivery in <24 hours did not differ significantly, and hyperstimulation with FHR changes was less with balloon catheter, however oxytocin augmentation was more likely in the catheter group (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.15-1.97)[ 3].
Meanwhile, now that silicone implants are no longer thought to cause auto-immune disease, surgical breast augmentation is more popular than ever.
The heat transfer augmentation is more significant near the stagnation point than in correspondence with the end of the impinged plate.
But in Jelonek's film, the augmentations are more subtle.That's not to say these tech-imitations should replace nature, though, but that they can perhaps exist alongside our experiences of going out hiking or taking a stroll in a field.
Julia and I didn't put forward a percentage in our 2016 book, but we argued that augmentation was a more desirable and more likely outcome for most jobs.
Compared to normal subjects, in diabetics augmentation of flow was more (fig 3B), in order to compensate for the reduced CO response during recovery.
As shown in Figure 3, both ALN and RIS treatment resulted in significant peri-implant BMD augmentation, and ALN was more effective than RIS (+12% at week 12 and +24% at week 24, p < 0.05).
In this study, quetiapine augmentation was no more effective than placebo augmentation of SRIs.
