ライフサイエンスコーパス: was used to compare

1 Here, life cycle assessment was used to compare 10 environmental impacts from the product

2 The Akaike information criterion was used to compare 2 univariate models.

3 A difference-in-differences regression design was used to compare admission rates in populations with and w

4 categorical data with adjustments for multiple comparisons was used to compare adverse event rates among the products.

5 Quantitative PCR was used to compare bacterial load and Illumina MiSeq sequenc

6 The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare baseline and hyperoxic parameters.

7 Simple and multivariable linear regression was used to compare body mass index groups.

8 A whole-brain cluster-corrected analysis was used to compare BOLD activation for main effects of the P

9 A linear mixed model was used to compare breast-milk VDA between the 3 study group

10 A linear mixed-effects model was used to compare changes in anterior chamber and angle var

11 Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare changes in drug prices and number of manu

12 Multiple regression analysis was used to compare changes over time in rescue symptomatic A

13 A linear mixed-effects statistical model was used to compare detection accuracy between FBP and SAFIRE

14 McNemar test was used to compare diagnostic accuracies.

15 Intraclass correlation was used to compare diameters and volumes.

16 Longitudinal mixed-effects repeated-measures modeling was used to compare ECT plus medication and medication alone

17 ates were ascertained and propensity-matched Cox regression was used to compare event rates according to beta-blocker usa

18 Stepwise logistic regression was used to compare factors associated with one or more acute

19 or within groups, and Pearson and Spearman rank correlation was used to compare fibrosis measured in vivo and ex vivo.

20 ference in metabolic capacity, a spectrofluorometric method was used to compare general cytochrome P450 enzyme activity b

21 Spearman rank correlation was used to compare handling of MR imaging guidewires and sta

22 Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare hospital mortality across both groups, ad

23 Hierarchical logistic regression was used to compare in-hospital outcomes and health care reso

24 l variables and a penalised Cox proportional-hazards model, was used to compare method performance.

25 GM-based spatial statistics was used to compare neurite orientation dispersion and densit

26 Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to compare overall survival (OS) between RT dose gro

27 A stratified log-rank test was used to compare overall survival between treatment groups

28 Multivariate analysis was used to compare pathological outcomes.

29 The Fisher exact test (2-tailed) was used to compare proportions, Student t test and Wilcoxon

30 fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized during 2009-2014 was used to compare quality and costs of hospital care delive

31 An asymmetry index was used to compare R2* within the thalamus ipsilateral versu

32 Poisson regression was used to compare rates between diagnosis groups while adju

33 Cox hazards analysis was used to compare rates between groups at discrete time poi

34 ounting for the competing risk of death; Poisson regression was used to compare rates of NCD occurrence by demographic su

35 Analysis of variance was used to compare readmission penalties in hospitals with c

36 Logistic regression was used to compare resistance patterns, serotypes, and patie

37 Survival analysis was used to compare risk of disease in individuals with and w

38 For both approaches the same type of statistical procedure was used to compare samples: principal component analysis (PC

39 Logistic regression was used to compare the 2 groups.

40 rray detector (HPLC-DAD) and a mass spectrometer (UPLC-MS), was used to compare the direct injection of the samples with

41 The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the distribution of grades at each statio

42 a technique for targeting the extracellular proteome, which was used to compare the metasecretome and meta-surface-proteo

43 The root-mean-squared error (RMSE) was used to compare the MR-based attenuation correction with

44 To pursue these experiments, a mechanistic approach was used to compare the pre-steady-state kinetics of KIF3AC t

45 Fisher exact test was used to compare the proportion of CMV viremia and CMV ret

46 of TT, adenoidectomy, and number of ear drop prescriptions was used to compare the rate of perforation between quinolone

47 Chemical RNA footprinting was used to compare the secondary structures of protein-free

48 regression with 2 linear splines and a knot at January 2015 was used to compare the slope of the change in EVT use before

49 -sum test were used to compare means, and the log-rank test was used to compare time-to-outcome events.

50 Log-rank test was used to compare time-to-parasitemia between interventions