1 s and change in ACE-R scores between visits (
analyses of variance).
2 cases and controls in the OHTS cohort using
analyses of variance.
3 h and groups were compared using mixed-model
analyses of variance.
4 amplitude data were submitted to split-plot
analyses of variance.
5 food groups were tested by using one-factor
analyses of variance.
6 6 months and 1 year using repeated-measures
analyses of variance.
7 Changes over time were analyzed using
analyses of variance.
8 endent samples t tests and repeated-measures
analyses of variance.
9 PRE-DBS/DBS OFF/DBS ON) by repeated measures
analyses of variance.
10 th baseline visual acuity was assessed using
analyses of variance and correlation coefficients.
11 We used
analyses of variance and covariance to estimate the rela
12 Analyses of variance and covariance were performed to as
13 were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and
analyses of variance and covariance with ApoE4 status an
14 Analyses of variance and log-rank tests were used to eva
15 Using factorial
analyses of variance and multiple discriminant analyses,
16 between the PNET surveillance algorithms by
analyses of variance,
and a two-tailed P value less than
17 yzed using Student's paired t-tests, two-way
analyses of variance,
and Spearman's correlation tests.
18 Analyses of variance (
ANOVA) and Bonferroni post hoc ana
19 Analyses of variance (
ANOVA) followed by Fisher protecte
20 Analyses of variance (
ANOVAs) found 3,669 protein-coding
21 Univariate
analyses of variance (
ANOVAs) revealed a significant eff
22 Multivariate
analyses of variance (
ANOVAs) revealed that EO-EC variat
23 Multivariate
analyses of variance assessed differences and associatio
24 Repeated measures
analyses of variance compared change in spoken language
25 Analyses of variance compared hemodynamic metrics, respi
26 Analyses of variance failed to show an association betwe
27 Two-way
analyses of variance,
followed by Fisher's protected lea
28 aseline TFV-DP was compared using t-tests or
analyses of variance;
generalized estimating equations w
29 roup comparisons were performed with one-way
analyses of variance including sex, medication use, and
30 Multivariate
analyses of variance indicated a distinct pattern of reg
31 Standard methods, such as t tests and
analyses of variance,
may be poor choices for data that
32 Analyses of variance of FA and BOLD PSC were used to det
33 Analyses of variance of the (tester- control) difference
34 Analyses of variance of the two MIR and TD-NMR datasets
35 asures were compared using repeated-measures
analyses of variance or paired t tests.
36 ps using separate unadjusted cross-sectional
analyses of variance (
P > 0.15 for analyses at all time
37 Parametric (
analyses of variance,
paired t tests) and nonparametric
38 Regional CBF was compared by using
analyses of variance;
permutation tests were used for vo
39 State Examination (MMSE) scores at baseline (
analyses of variance,
receiver operating characteristics
40 Permutational multivariate
analyses of variance revealed clear differentiation of a
41 Analyses of variance revealed main effects, but not an i
42 Analyses of variance revealed no significant group-by-ti
43 Analyses of variance revealed that PRT increased LBM and
44 These
analyses of variance showed a highly significant reducti
45 Groups were compared using
analyses of variance,
t tests, and correlation analyses.
46 An
analyses of variance was performed similar to that used
47 Principal component analyses and
analyses of variance were carried out with the aim of st
48 Two-way
analyses of variance were conducted to assess regional d
49 Multivariate mixed-model
analyses of variance were conducted to compare groups on
50 Mixed-design
analyses of variance were conducted to examine treatment
51 Multivariate
analyses of variance were conducted to explore differenc
52 Analyses of variance were performed for all variables, a
53 nalysis of variance and follow-up univariate
analyses of variance were performed to compare those wom
54 Repeated measures
analyses of variance were performed to detect significan
55 Analyses of variance were performed to detect significan
56 Repeated measures
analyses of variance were performed to evaluate whether
57 Student t tests and
analyses of variance were performed.
58 One-way and mixed-design
analyses of variance were used for statistical analysis.
59 Analyses of variance were used to assess levels of accep
60 Random-effects and repeated-measures
analyses of variance were used to assess operator differ
61 Univariate
analyses of variance were used to examine the relationsh
62 Factorial
analyses of variance were used to explore physical and m
63 Multivariate
analyses of variance were used to investigate difference
64 Mixed model
analyses of variance were used to test the significance
65 Results were compared using
analyses of variance with a PCD-CT maximum dose and reso
66 erences in ED, DF, and MBS were assessed via
analyses of variance with Bonferroni and Tukey honest si
67 Data were analyzed using
analyses of variance with group as the between-subjects
68 One-way
analyses of variance with post hoc Tukey Honestly Signif
69 d from a representative national sample, and
analyses of variance with post-hoc comparisons were cond
70 Repeated measures
analyses of variance yielded no significant differences