ライフサイエンスコーパス: Student

1 Student activity during stream classes may cause substra

2 Student attendance at clinical and tutorial-based activi

3 Student attendance is thought to be an important factor

4 Student career aspirations are directly linked to the ca

5 Student debt after periodontal residency was significant

6 Student dormitory rooms tended to have higher levels of

7 Student food selection data were collected daily from Ja

8 Student nurses cite unsatisfactory placement experiences

9 Student nurses' clinical assessment was divided into 3 t

10 Student paired t tests based on a logarithmic scale were

11 Student paired t-test confirmed a statistically signific

12 Student perceptions of antimicrobial coursework and actu

13 Student self-report of whether he or she ever used e-cig

14 Student t and chi tests were used for univariate analysi

15 Student t and chi(2) tests were used for statistical ana

16 Student t test and Cochran-Armitage trend test was used

17 Student t test statistics were applied to report signifi

18 Student t test was used for the comparison of the FDs of

19 Student t test was used for the comparison of the FDs.

20 Student t test was used to compare attenuation and SNR m

21 Student t test was used to determine any demographic dif

22 Student t test was used to evaluate sex differences in c

23 Student t test was used to test for differences in mean

24 Student t test, chi(2), and multiple logistic regression

25 Student t test, chi2 test, and multivariate regression a

26 Student t tests and chi(2) tests were performed to compa

27 Student t tests were performed to assess significance be

28 Student t tests were used to compare the OCTA biomarkers

29 Student t tests were used to perform comparisons.

30 Student t tests, one-way analysis of variance, Pearson c

31 Student t, Mann-Whitney, chi(2), Fisher exact, and McNem

32 Student t-tests were used to analyze those clinical para

33 Student's t tests demonstrate significant differences (p

34 Student's t tests for equality of means were used to ass

35 Student's t-test and Ranking-PCA analyses were performed

36 Student's t-test or Wilcoxon signed rank test were used

37 Student's t-test was applied to compare vascular enhance

38 Student's t-test was used to compare average values and

39 Student's t-test was used to test significance of associ

40 Student's t-tests, chi(2) analyses, and linear and logis

41 Student's two-sample t test for normally distributed var

42 levels were significantly lower (P < 0.001, Student's t test) in mice that consumed diets amended wi

43 /-455 (mean+/-se wt vs. TSP1(-/-)); P<0.001, Student's t test] and impaired neuronal differentiation

44 e in both the intervention study (q = 0.004, Student's t-test) and the cross-sectional study (q = 0.0

45 sing anti-Rho-SPION-Ran, eyedrops, P = 0.03, Student's t test), and gliosis in Muller cells (at 6 mo,

46 different between the two groups (p < 0.05, Student's t test).

47 ed that changed at least 1.5 fold (p < 0.05, Student's t-test) in abundance between transgenic (tBN)

48 significant difference between arms 1 and 2 (Student t test, P = 0.02).

49 Pearson chi(2), Student t test, logistic regression, and kappa statistic

50 - 1.61 days, Degrees of freedom (df) = 2960, Student's t (t) = 3.2 (P = .0014), and mean duration of

51 enerated on the two systems (P value = 0.88; Student's t test).

52 A Student t test was used to examine differences in the in

53 ing a chi(2) test for categorical data and a Student t test for continuous variables, with a Fisher e

54 pplication of traditional methods, such as a Student's t-Test or a 2-way ANOVA, in these situations g

55 bjected to statistical analysis, including a Student t test and multiple linear regression.

56 We used a Student's t test to observe any differences between the

57 server performance was determined by using a Student t distribution; P values less than .05 indicated

58 ameters on diagnostic performance by using a Student t test or a one-way analysis of variance.

59 ime constants (tau) were compared by using a Student t test.

60 us section orientations were analyzed with a Student t test for independent groups and a repeated-mea

61 Continuous variables were evaluated with a Student t test.

62 analyzed IOP variations from baseline with a Student t-test for a paired sample.

63 were studied by using univariable analyses (Student t test, chi(2) test, or Fisher exact test, as ap

64 For statistical analysis, Student t test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Spearman's corr

65 re made with a combined fold change >/=2 and Student's t-test p-value < 0.05 to denote significance;

66 chi(2) and Student t tests were used to compare biopsy time, and th

67 t comparisons were analyzed using chi(2) and Student t tests, logistic regression (predictive), and g

68 Fisher exact, Pearson chi(2), and Student t tests were applied as indicated.

69 by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student Newman Keuls's post hoc test at alpha = 0.05 sig

70 Repeated-measures ANOVAs and Student's two-tailed t-tests were used for statistical c

71 for violations of Cochran's assumptions) and Student's t test for continuous variables (Mann-Whitney

72 performed using the Pearson correlation and Student's t test.

73 s using generalized estimating equations and Student t tests.

74 was performed with chi(2), Fisher exact, and Student t tests.

75 ides were assessed by using Tukey-Kramer and Student t tests, respectively.

76 thout CAD were compared by using McNemar and Student t tests, respectively.

77 ed estimating equation regression model, and Student t tests were used to obtain limits of agreement

78 ed by principal component analysis (PCA) and Student's t-test (p<0.05).

79 Chi-square and Student t test were used where appropriate.

80 The Fisher exact test and Student t test analysis were performed and relative risk

81 d by using the Wilcoxon singed-rank test and Student t test for matched pairs.

82 compared by using the Mann-Whitney test and Student t test.

83 he chi-square test for ordinal variables and Student's t-test for continuous variables.

84 Two-way analysis of variance and Student t test were used for statistical analyses, with

85 Two-way analysis of variance and Student t tests were used to determine significant diffe

86 significantly lower tooth deformation (ANOVA/Student-Newman-Keuls post hoc, p = 0.05).

87 d reliable than conventional methods such as Student's t-test or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

88 nalysis of data from the Global School-based Student Health Survey (GSHS) for adolescents aged 12-15

89 We extracted Global School-Based Student Health Surveys (GSHS) datasets from the Centers

90 ernational Society for Computational Biology Student Council (ISCB-SC) and its Regional Student Group

91 ernational Society for Computational Biology Student Council (ISCB-SC), Regional Student Groups (RSGs

92 The Venetia Burney Student Dust Counter, which measures grains with radii l

93 2 mm Hg) to followup (24.3 mm Hg) (P<0.05 by Student's t-test).

94 son of the different classes was executed by Student t test.

95 entially regulated miRNAs were identified by Student's t test and Bonferroni correction.

96 tion and discriminant validity was tested by Student t tests.

97 essed proteins (at least +/-1.5-fold change; Student's t test, P < 0.05) were identified by mass spec

98 ere calculated for both groups and compared (Student t test).

99 score differences among cases and controls (Student t test) and the risk of developing MS comparing

100 mprehensive Assessment Test; and Exceptional Student Education placement owing to orthopedic, speech,

101 s for coefficients, i.e. double-exponential, Student-t, mixture double-exponential and mixture Studen

102 Paired analysis from Student t test on MRI parameters and clinical parameters

103 DE concentrations were significantly higher (Student's paired comparisons t test, alpha = 0.05) in se

104 , which corresponds to a p-value < 10(-9) in Student's t-test.

105 r analyzing and interpreting VFDs, including Student's t tests and rank-sum tests, as well as competi

106 Independent Student's t tests in all regions of interest were statis

107 The Mann-Whitney U test and independent Student t test were used for nonparametric and parametri

108 ables were compared by using the independent Student t test and analysis of variance.

109 tical reports, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), and the World Values Survey t

110 collected by the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), including the mathematics and

111 nal Society for Computational Biology (ISCB) Student Council Regional Student Groups (RSGs) activitie

112 demographic comparisons with age were made (Student t test, Satterthwaite test), and proportion conf

113 actions with their schools' American Medical Student Association (AMSA) PharmFree Scorecard and avera

114 nt-t, mixture double-exponential and mixture Student-t.

115 h the probe was visible and when it was not (Student t test, alpha= 0.05).

116 ealth School Physical Activity and Nutrition Student Questionnaire measured physical activity behavio

117 showed no significant differences in term of Student's t-test.

118 Changes in T2* were compared based on Student t tests.

119 Z test or Student t test was used, when appropriate, to calculate

120 alysis, data were analysed by chi(2) test or Student's t-test as appropriate.

121 a were compared by using the Mann-Whitney or Student t test, and correlations were performed by using

122 Paired Student t test was used to assess the significance of di

123 Paired Student t test, chi(2) test, Pearson correlation coeffic

124 Paired Student t test, linear regression analysis, and Pearson

125 Paired Student t tests were performed to compare results betwee

126 Paired Student t tests were used to compare average SNRs and CN

127 Paired Student t tests were used to compare the tumor region wi

128 fferences were analyzed by means of a paired Student t test and repeated two-way analysis of variance

129 A paired Student t test was used to compare continuous variables

130 ter delivery was evaluated by using a paired Student t test.

131 A 2-tailed Fisher exact test and paired Student t test were used for statistical analysis.

132 Data were analyzed by paired Student t test comparing the effect of cell fractions in

133 from baseline, which was evaluated by paired Student t tests.

134 stical significance was determined by paired Student's t tests between tooth-implant pairs.

135 nificantly increased following LPI by paired Student's t-tests (all P < 0.0001).

136 gle width parameters were compared by paired Student's t-tests.

137 -interest analysis with the two-sided paired Student t test.

138 Two-sided paired Student t tests were used for statistical evaluation.

139 en groups were performed by using the paired Student t test for continuous variables and the McNemar

140 nation of power and time by using the paired Student t test.

141 e analysis was performed by using the paired Student t test.

142 nificance was determined by using the paired Student t test.

143 fferences were evaluated by using the paired Student t test.

144 were determined and analyzed by using paired Student t test and Spearman correlation.

145 cement values, were compared by using paired Student t tests and Bland-Altman plots.

146 cancer and PZ were compared by using paired Student t tests.

147 y randomisation group were tested via paired Student's t test.

148 Follow-up analysis was performed with paired Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test.

149 s within patients were performed with paired Student t test, between groups with unpaired Student t t

150 metabolite levels were evaluated with paired Student t tests, cluster-based analyses, and multivariab

151 idence intervals and compared using pairwise Student t tests.

152 berculosis at the University of Pennsylvania Student Health Service between 2009 and 2011.

153 They used data from the Project Student Teacher Achievement Ratio, a 4-year multicenter

154 (2-tailed) was used to compare proportions, Student t test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to c

155 onal Biology (ISCB) Student Council Regional Student Groups (RSGs) activities.

156 y Student Council (ISCB-SC) and its Regional Student Group (RSG) program, takes time and energy.

157 Biology Student Council (ISCB-SC), Regional Student Groups (RSGs) have helped organise workshops in

158 le reviews events undertaken by the Regional Student Groups (RSGs) in India and Argentina, the proble

159 tatistical methods used were Cox regression, Student t test, and Mann-Whitney U test.

160 of Nephrology Foundation for Kidney Research Student Scholar Grant Program, Centers for Disease Contr

161 then be approached by either the one-sample Student's t-test or Wilcoxon signed rank test.

162 visual acuity >/= 0.8 (n = 23) by one-sample Student's t-tests.

163 involved an unpaired, uncorrected, two-sided Student t test.

164 althy control animals by using the two-sided Student t test.

165 robability distributions, such as the skewed Student [Formula: see text] used here, when making forec

166 cal analyses were performed using a 2-tailed Student t-test.

167 We model residual errors with a heavy-tailed Student's t-distribution to estimate a manifold that is

168 Paired, one-tailed Student t tests were performed to assess for statistical

169 An unpaired, two-tailed Student t test was used to compare groups; Spearman corr

170 A two-tailed Student t test was used to compare the T1 and T2 results

171 A paired two-tailed Student t test was used to evaluate significance of post

172 ficance was tested using a paired two-tailed Student t test.

173 1 month after therapy by using a two-tailed Student t test.

174 with analysis of variance and the two-tailed Student t test.

175 Two-tailed Student t tests and repeated-measures analysis of varian

176 r operating characteristic curve, two-tailed Student t tests, prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa val

177 ween groups was assessed with the two-tailed Student's t test.

178 is was done by employing unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test and the p-value of < 0.05 was deemed as

179 rent groups was evaluated using a two-tailed Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U test.

180 n, P = 0.0004; breast P < 0.0001, two-tailed Student's t-test).

181 as performed by using the Fisher exact test, Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test, depending

182 tical methods including Fisher's Exact Test, Student's t-test, ANOVA, non-parametric tests, linear re

183 Chi-square test, Student's t test, and Cox regression were used for stati

184 The chi-square test, Student's t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for

185 The two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Student t test, test for linear regression, analysis of

186 s determined by using the Mann-Whitney test, Student t test, chi(2) test, and Pearson correlation coe

187 hniques were compared by using paired tests (Student t test, Wilcoxon test, or McNemar test, accordin

188 The Student t test and Bland-Altman plots were used to quant

189 The Student t test and chi(2) test were used for statistical

190 The Student t test was applied for independent samples (P <0

191 The Student t test was used for all continuous variables and

192 The Student t test was used for statistical analysis.

193 The Student t test was used to compare groups.

194 The Student t test, log-rank, or Cox proportional hazards mo

195 The Student t test, paired t test, and Kruskal-Wallis one-wa

196 The Student t test, the Fisher exact test, and multivariate

197 The Student t test, the Mann-Whitney test, and the Levene te

198 The Student's t-test is the most valuable procedure when the

199 The Student-Newman-Keuls test has been applied to ascertain

200 tudies--the Human Microbiome Project and the Student Microbiome Project--we show that gut and mouth m

201 as determined with kappa statistics, and the Student t test was used to assess differences in the mea

202 used to compare complication rates, and the Student t test was used to compare LOS.

203 ed with one-way analysis of variance and the Student t test.

204 sed the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Student's t-test.

205 cannot be analyzed with methods such as the Student's t-test.

206 Continuous data were compared by the Student t test or ANOVA, and categoric variables were co

207 wo-way analysis of variance, followed by the Student t test with post hoc Bonferroni correction.

208 samples; for intraindividual comparison, the Student t test for paired samples was used.

209 To compare the two groups, the Student t test or Wilcoxon test were used to evaluate di

210 Statistical comparisons included the Student pairwise t test and the McNemar test in 2x2 cont

211 Statistical analyses included the Student t test, linear regression, Bland-Altman analysis

212 ct test was used to compare proportions; the Student t test was used to compare means.

213 ysis was performed with the chi(2) test, the Student t test, and logistic regression.

214 Data were analyzed using the Student t test and chi analyses where appropriate.

215 Statistical analysis was conducted using the Student t test and correlation analysis.

216 tistical analysis was performed by using the Student t test and one-way analysis of variance for the

217 ement differences were assessed by using the Student t test and the F test; P < .05 was considered to

218 red, and statistically analyzed by using the Student t test and two-way analysis of variance.

219 ualitative scores were compared by using the Student t test for independent samples, and SNR profiles

220 ween the regimens were compared by using the Student t test for unpaired samples; for intraindividual

221 Quantitative data were compared using the Student t test or Wilcoxon test.

222 compared between animal cohorts by using the Student t test, and receiver operating characteristic (R

223 Data were assessed by using the Student t test, exact binomial distribution, two-sample

224 coronal diameters of the thorax by using the Student t test, Fisher exact test, and Pearson correlati

225 Comparisons were made by using the Student t test, Mann-Whitney test for quantitative data,

226 Data were analyzed using the Student t test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher exact te

227 SF-to-BM SUV ratios were compared using the Student t test.

228 e detection rate was determined by using the Student t test.

229 Metric variables were evaluated using the Student t test.

230 e between groups was determined by using the Student t test.

231 Significance was calculated by using the Student t test.

232 Comparisons were performed by using the Student t test.

233 ts with DM and control subjects by using the Student t test.

234 d antibody levels were compared by using the Student t test.

235 tistical analysis was performed by using the Student t test.

236 e significance of sex was assessed using the Student t test.

237 control subjects were compared by using the Student t test.

238 th the final treatment response by using the Student t test.

239 image quality and were compared by using the Student t test.

240 Groups were compared using the Student t test.

241 cant differences were evaluated by using the Student t, analysis of variance, Wilcoxon, and Tukey Hon

242 screening population were made by using the Student t, Pearson chi(2), and Fisher exact tests.

243 Data were analyzed by using the Student t, Wilcoxon matched pair, Mann-Whitney, Spearman

244 parisons between individual groups using the Student's t test with a Bonferroni correction.

245 ompared between CIN and PTX groups using the Student's t test.

246 rmed using a 1-way analysis of variance, the Student t test, chi test, and Mann-Whitney test where ap

247 repeated measures analysis of variance, the Student t test, chi(2) test, and correlation analysis.

248 ansmurality, and data were compared with the Student t test and Bland-Altman test.

249 Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t test and Fisher exact test.

250 ferences in variables were analyzed with the Student t test and logistic regression.

251 d myocardial fibrosis was evaluated with the Student t test and multivariable regression analysis.

252 Data were analyzed with the Student t test and Pearson correlation.

253 Statistical analyses were performed with the Student t test for continuous bivariate comparisons, the

254 Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t test, analysis of variance, and Pearson correl

255 rences in mean DeltaR2* were tested with the Student t test, and diagnostic accuracy was tested by ca

256 Statistical analysis was performed with the Student t test, chi(2) analysis, and mixed-model analysi

257 istical significance was determined with the Student t test, the paired t test, a mixed random effect

258 recorded at 6 months were compared with the Student t test.

259 Group comparisons were performed with the Student t test.

260 Data were compared with the Student t test.

261 d Blood Clotting Study (GABC) or the Trinity Student Study (TSS).

262 Unpaired Student t, chi(2), Fisher exact, and Mann-Whitney U test

263 ompared between the groups using an unpaired Student's t-test or an equivalent nonparametric test.

264 ose who did by using the chi(2) and unpaired Student t tests.

265 The standard unpaired Student t test was used to compare groups.

266 were compared by using a two-tailed unpaired Student t test.

267 images were performed by using the unpaired Student t test for continuous variables and the chi(2) t

268 Student t test, between groups with unpaired Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test, and linear regres

269 Statistical analysis used Student's t test and multivariate linear regression.

270 We used Student's t test to assess the primary outcome for stati

271 nces between both groups were analysed using Student t-test for parametric data and Mann-Whitney U te

272 nd changes with exercise were analysed using Student's unpaired t tests.

273 The data were analyzed using Student's t test for continuous data, chi square for cat

274 butions were evaluated and assessed by using Student paired t test.

275 groups were statistically assessed by using Student t and chi(2) tests corrected for multiple compar

276 Statistical analyses were performed by using Student t and Pearson chi(2) tests.

277 Comparison of means was performed by using Student t test, correlation was determined by using Pear

278 Comparisons were performed by using Student t tests for continuous variables.

279 Statistical analysis was performed by using Student t tests.

280 Clinical data were analyzed by using Student t tests.

281 nd control cohorts, were identified by using Student two-tailed paired and unpaired t test, respectiv

282 Univariate analysis was completed using Student's t test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and analysis o

283 antibiotic therapy rate was conducted using Student t test.

284 AG eyes and control eyes were examined using Student's t-test.

285 intragroup comparisons were performed using Student t test, and P <0.05 was considered statistically

286 knesses, were examined retrospectively using Student t test, Pearson chi(2) test, and logistic regres

287 sitive correlation ([0.18 correlation value] Student's t value [173 degrees of freedom] = 2.39; P = 0

288 itive correlation ([0.338 correlation value] Student's t value [173 degrees of freedom] = 4.69; P <0.

289 y (healthy group: [-0.23, correlation value] Student's t value [73 degrees of freedom] = 1.99; P = 0.

290 mal versus nonoptimal ACS care were made via Student t test for continuous variables and chi(2) test

291 ted and compared between the two studies via Student t tests for mean location, using a >5% cutoff fo

292 Statistical significance was analyzed with Student t test.

293 Data were analyzed with Student t, Wilcoxon, and McNemar tests.

294 Results were compared with Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test.

295 Continuous variables were compared with Student t test, and categorical variables were compared

296 Acute rejection was compared with Student's t test.

297 Statistical analysis was done with Student's t test, chi(2) test, logistic regression, and

298 each legume group and the control group with Student's t test.Of the 355 infants enrolled, 291 infant

299 and myocardial perfusion reserve index with Student t test and Bland-Altman analyses.

300 at different dose levels were performed with Student t test.