Exact(8)
However, we hypothesize that in the case of the SPINK1 N34S high-risk haplotype, the variation in reported effect sizes may be a result of differences in the proportion of subjects with pathogenic pathways linking environmental stressors to pancreatic stellate cell (PSC) activation through recurrent trypsinogen activation and inadequate trypsin inhibition by SPINK1.
Changes in study quality may be related to the decrease in reported effect size.
In our meta-analysis this effect may have mitigated the size of the observed decrease in reported effect size.
In theory, the combination of Publication Bias and increased study size could contribute to the gradual decrease in reported effect size.
Despite the differences in reported effect, transport in the lung can be regulated in ways other than channel abundance, and moreover, apical Na+ re-entry is believed to be the rate limiting step.
Objective To investigate whether discrepancies in trials of use of bone marrow stem cells in patients with heart disease account for the variation in reported effect size in improvement of left ventricular function.
Similar(52)
Psychedelic experiences are necessarily somewhat subjective and variations in reported effects are to be expected.
Wide variations in reported effects of small genetic association studies have been attributed to statistical variation in underpowered studies, poor methodology, publication bias toward studies with large ORs as well as a myriad of other non-biological factors [20], [21], [22].
Comparison of pyrethroid effects on QNB binding across studies does not reveal clear trends in reported effects between laboratories.
Directional differences in reported effects may stem from different levels and durations of exposure, and may explain the positive association with T3 observed here among Akwesasne adolescents.
Consequently, we analyze and control for systematic differences in the reported effect sizes via multiple meta-regression analysis following recent publications in economics and finance (among others, Carney et al. 2011; Feld et al. 2013; Hang et al. 2017; Havranek and Irsova 2011).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com