ライフサイエンスコーパス: exact test

1 ined (1.6% versus 4.7%, P = 0.02 by Fisher's exact test).

2 n PDACs without dMMR or MSI (P = .08; Fisher exact test).

3 -augmented reinforcement (P < 0.0001; Fisher exact test).

4 rta and tetralogy of Fallot (P=0.002; Fisher exact test).

5 tive HPV results (48% vs. 0%; P=0.06, Fisher exact test).

6 hout (p = 3.12 x 10(-3), two-tailed Fisher's exact test).

7 of those with UC >1 year (P = .04, Fisher's exact test).

8 with none in the controls (P=0.0005, Fisher exact test).

9 ent to a CSF reservoir (P < 0.0001, Fisher's exact test).

10 nterval, 1.56 to 2.86; P=1.68x10(-6) (Fisher exact test).

11 antly associated with pCR (P = 0.007; Fisher exact test).

12 postimmunization sera (P = 0.0008, Fisher's exact test).

13 CHDs (p = 3.30 x 10(-2), two-tailed Fisher's exact test).

14 esponse to interferon therapy (P=1.0, Fisher exact test).

15 e non-ischemic patients (P = 0.005, Fisher's exact test).

16 PCS group (1/822 [0.12%]; P = 0.0002, Fisher exact test).

17 ncing progression to PCa (P = .014, Fisher's exact test).

18 low eyes only in 3 cases (p = 0.13, Fisher's exact test).

19 = 0.026), or SFN group (P = 0.002 by Fisher exact test).

20 6.25 [95% CI, 1.78-21.93]; P = .001, Fisher exact test).

21 adherence rate of 18.7% (P < 0.0001, Fisher exact test).

22 sumed microvascular cause (P = 0.003, Fisher exact test).

23 orted never wearing glasses (P<0.001, Fisher exact test).

24 s or oculoplastic surgeons (P<0.0001, Fisher exact test).

25 , and number of preventable failures (Fisher exact test).

26 ere in the slow DT group (P<0.0002; Fisher's exact test).

27 onfidence intervals of 0.003%-0.56% (Fischer exact test).

28 ) sequences with DRMinVs (P < .00001, Fisher exact test).

29 al with non-inducible VT (P < 0.01, Fisher's exact test).

30 and 0.1%, respectively (P=0.002 by Fisher's exact test).

31 tigated (ancova, Mann-Whitney U-test, Fisher exact test).

32 Prevalence was compared using Fisher's exact test.

33 ompared across sequences by using the Fisher exact test.

34 n patterns were analyzed by using the Fisher exact test.

35 using Chi-square test or Univariate Fisher's exact test.

36 subtype ( P = .383), as assessed by Fisher's exact test.

37 variables were compared by using the Fisher exact test.

38 ategorical data were evaluated with Fisher's exact test.

39 ded vessels for each vessel type with Fisher exact test.

40 Associations were tested with the Fisher exact test.

41 the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon, chi(2), or Fisher exact test.

42 ARC groups were compared by using the Fisher exact test.

43 in the matched subgroups by using the Fisher exact test.

44 e compared across groups by using the Fisher exact test.

45 les were compared using chi-square/Fischer's exact test.

46 pared categorical variables using the Fisher exact test.

47 rs7848647 SNP was assessed by the Fischer's exact test.

48 d BAP1 genes were tested by using the Fisher exact test.

49 d with Wilcoxon's rank sum test and Fisher's exact test.

50 ical management was assessed with the Fisher exact test.

51 is using analysis of variance and the Fisher exact test.

52 re compared by using either chi(2) or Fisher exact test.

53 nce of mutations was compared using Fisher's exact test.

54 performed with the Student t test and Fisher exact test.

55 n proportions were analyzed using the Fisher exact test.

56 assessed with the Pearson chi(2) or Fishers exact test.

57 nd genomics were studied by using the Fisher exact test.

58 ups in proportions were assessed by Fisher's exact test.

59 ication rates were compared using the Fisher exact test.

60 compared using the chi-square test or Fisher exact test.

61 d text parsing identification using a Fisher exact test.

62 cy table needed for calculating the Fisher's Exact Test.

63 res with outcomes by using t test and Fisher exact test.

64 ), the Kruskal-Wallis H test, and the Fisher exact test.

65 dent t test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher exact test.

66 compared using Pearson's chi(2) or Fisher's exact test.

67 egorical data were compared using the Fisher exact test.

68 those with sporadic CCM by using the Fisher exact test.

69 ype frequencies were compared using Fisher's exact test.

70 ical variables were compared with the Fisher exact test.

71 ion of metastases using the chi(2) or Fisher exact test.

72 isons of regimens were assessed using Fisher exact test.

73 rating characteristic curves, and the Fisher exact test.

74 sample t tests, chi-square tests, and Fisher exact tests.

75 operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and exact tests.

76 oxon signed-rank, Mann-Whitney U, and Fisher exact tests.

77 ng ANOVA, Wilcoxon Rank Sum, chi, and Fisher Exact tests.

78 stics were examined with chi(2) and Fisher's exact tests.

79 using generalized additive models and Fisher exact tests.

80 -Whitney U, Wilcoxon signed rank, and Fisher exact tests.

81 ment were analyzed using log-rank and Fisher exact tests.

82 sociation tests were assessed using Fisher's exact tests.

83 ommended care was compared by using Fisher's exact tests.

84 compared by race and by sex, using Fisher's exact tests.

85 re analyzed using the Chi-squared and Fisher exact tests.

86 lary lymph node status with chi(2) or Fisher exact tests.

87 ons were compared by using chi(2) and Fisher exact tests.

88 rank tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and Fisher exact tests.

89 and women (51% and 54%, respectively; Fisher exact test =0.39; equivalence P=0.0002).

90 effect of SHUTi versus HealthWatch (Fisher's exact test=0.52; p=0.32).

91 The Fisher exact test (2-tailed) was used to compare proportions, S

92 ates of adverse events using the conditional exact test, a modified vaccine cohort risk interval meth

93 ficantly associated with c.8057G>A (Fisher's exact test, adjusted p value < 0.0001).

94 al leakage was analyzed by chi(2) and Fisher exact tests (alpha = 5%).

95 e compared using the chi-square test, Fisher exact test, analysis of variance, and Kaplan-Meier analy

96 istic analyses Mann-Whitney U-test, Fisher's exact test and binary logistic regression were used.

97 omparison methods, e.g. chi 2 test, Fisher's exact test and Binomial test.

98 eristics and perceived burden using Fisher's exact test and bivariate modified Poisson regression.

99 The Fisher exact test and exact logistic regression were used to co

100 variables were evaluated by using the Fisher exact test and linear models with generalized estimating

101 mparisons were conducted by using the Fisher exact test and log-rank test.

102 The Fisher exact test and multivariable logistic regression were us

103 Fisher exact test and multivariate regression were used to anal

104 A 2-tailed Fisher exact test and paired Student t test were used for stati

105 unt: the chi(2) test, likelihood ratio test, exact test and permutation test.

106 ttransplant 6MWD were evaluated using Fisher exact test and Spearman correlation.

107 The Fisher exact test and Student t test analysis were performed an

108 y used gene set enrichment methods, Fisher's exact test and the binomial test implemented in Genomic

109 n both arms were compared using the Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon Rank Sum test.

110 data analysis was performed using the Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

111 Fisher exact tests and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to analyz

112 th 2-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum, chi(2), Fisher exact tests and logistic regression (5% type I error rat

113 The results were analyzed using Fisher exact tests and multivariable logistic regression.

114 d with concordance were assessed with Fisher exact tests and tests for trend.

115 g hierarchic regressions or chi(2) or Fisher exact tests and with repeated-measures analysis of varia

116 equent in female recipients (P=0.007, Fisher exact test) and African American recipients (P<0.001) an

117 ases and 0.9% of controls; P = 0.002, Fisher exact test) and glaucoma (14.3% of cases and 7.2% of con

118 Bivariate (chi-square tests or the Fisher's exact test) and multivariate (logistic regression after

119 ndependent samples t test, x(2) test, Fisher exact test, and Cohen k.

120 ed using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, the Fisher exact test, and Kaplan-Meier analysis.

121 ession, one-way analysis of variance, Fisher exact test, and Kruskal-Wallis H test.

122 was compared with the Pearson chi2 or Fisher exact test, and lesion sizes were compared with the Wilc

123 The heteroscedastic t test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney test were used for statisti

124 chi(2) test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare

125 Chi-square analysis, Fisher's exact test, and multivariable logistic regression were u

126 Students t-test, Fischer exact test, and multivariable regression analyses were p

127 compared with the chi(2) statistic or Fisher exact test, and multivariate analysis was performed with

128 The Student t test, the Fisher exact test, and multivariate logistic regression were us

129 e thorax by using the Student t test, Fisher exact test, and Pearson correlation.

130 test, a linear regression model, the Fisher exact test, and Pearson correlation.

131 ncluded use of the two-sample t test, Fisher exact test, and Spearman correlation.

132 were performed with chi-square test, Fisher exact test, and t tests.

133 variables were measured by using the Fisher exact test, and the t test was used for continuous varia

134 with the trait, were identified via Fisher's exact test, and then the ratio of the sSNPs to total SNP

135 Chi-square tests, Fisher exact tests, and multivariate logistic regression were u

136 evaluated using standard statistics, Fisher exact tests, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests.

137 y the chi-square test; P = 0.006 by Fisher's exact test; and after adjustment for relatedness of pers

138 s such as Pearson chi-square test and Fisher Exact test are single test methods and do not work on co

139 yses (Student t test, chi(2) test, or Fisher exact test, as appropriate) and multivariable analyses (

140 se who did not by using the chi(2) or Fisher exact test, as appropriate.

141 ases, was compared with the chi(2) or Fisher exact test, as appropriate.

142 tive groups by Mann-Whitney U test or Fisher exact test, as appropriate.

143 ve groups by Mann-Whitney U test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate.

144 ed via Wilcoxon's rank-sum test and Fisher's exact test, as well as multivariate analysis.

145 Fisher Exact test assessed associations with CTR, and Kaplan-Me

146 Data analyses was performed using Fisher Exact tests assuming a Bonferroni correction threshold v

147 In this study, we proposed a new exact test based on the translation of rate comparison t

148 corticosteroid treatment (P = 0.002, Fisher exact test), but not with sclerosing inflammation presen

149 cteristics were compared by chi(2) or Fisher exact test (categorical variables) or Wilcoxon rank-sum

150 We used two-tailed Mann Whitney U exact tests, chi(2), and Fisher's exact tests to analyse

151 Fisher exact tests compared planned adjuvant treatment duration

152 ologic features (50% vs. 12%; P=0.07, Fisher exact test) compared with tumors showing negative result

153 ces in frequency were assessed with a Fisher exact test corrected for multiple comparisons.

154 tatistical analysis, evaluated by the Fisher exact test, did not show a significant postoperative dif

155 for association with CPM by using the Fisher exact test, exact chi(2) test, and multivariate logistic

156 Fisher's exact test examined the effect of diagnosis on rs1625579

157 Overlap statistics, such as Fishers Exact test (FET), are often employed to assess these ass

158 -operating-characteristic analyses or Fisher exact test for 2 x 2 contingency tables using subsequent

159 rating-characteristic analyses and by Fisher exact test for 2 x 2 contingency tables.

160 icance level (type I error) of 0.05 using an exact test for a binomial proportion.

161 sample size calculation method based on the exact test for assessing differential expression analysi

162 We formulate a weighted exact test for assessing the significance of mutual excl

163 We used Fisher exact test for categorical and Mann-Whitney U test for c

164 yzed using Pearson chi-square test or Fisher exact test for categorical variables, Mann-Whitney U tes

165 us variables and Pearson chi2 test or Fisher exact test for categorical variables.

166 t tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact test for categorical variables.

167 ests for continuous variables and the Fisher exact test for categorical variables.

168 Using Fisher's exact test for comparing the numbers of cases and contro

169 We performed the Fisher exact test for comparison of categorical values and Wilc

170 Analysis were done per protocol using Fisher exact test for complications and reoperations.

171 for quantitative data, and chi(2) or Fisher exact test for qualitative data.

172 test, chi2 tests of proportions, and Fisher exact test for small sample cross tables.

173 22q11.2 deletions found, using the Fisher's exact test for the independent case-control studies and

174 ey tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact tests for categorical data.

175 ade using Pearson chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests for categorical factors, and t tests or Krus

176 across the range using clustering analyses, exact tests for population differentiation, and a pedigr

177 ence and lower final BCVA (P = 0.604, Fisher exact test); however, development of ocular hypertension

178 test that is a more powerful version of the exact test in edgeR.

179 (38% vs. 13%, P=0.04 by a two-sided Fisher's exact test in the A5340 trial; and 80% vs. 13%, P<0.001

180 80% vs. 13%, P<0.001 by a two-sided Fisher's exact test in the NIH trial) but the difference was not

181 than those with T2a lesions (P = .02, Fisher exact test) in the alternative staging system.

182 was estimated using three methods: Fisher's exact test, index of association (IA) and Hedrick's D'.

183 Statistical analysis (Fisher's exact test) indicated there was no significant differenc

184 ysis (p = 2.68 x 10(-4), two-tailed Fisher's exact test), indicating that the SLC2A3 duplication migh

185 at the X chromosome, typically the chi(2) or exact test is applied to the females only, and the hemiz

186 tor analyses were performed using the Fisher exact test, log-rank test, and hazard ratio (HR).

187 Fisher exact test, log-rank test, and Mann-Whitney U test were

188 d genitourinary cases using chi(2) or Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney test, and logistic regression.

189 Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney test, Spearman correlation, and

190 or statistical analysis, chi(2) test, Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Wilcoxon test were

191 We applied exact testing methods to examine distributions of DNA se

192 y U test, independent samples t test, Fisher exact test, multivariate logistic regression analysis of

193 were compared by using chi(2) tests, Fisher exact tests, odds ratios (ORs), and confidence intervals

194 of each incidental finding, performed Fisher exact test or chi-square test for categorical variables

195 and symptomatic patients by using the Fisher exact test or the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, as appropr

196 s and means were compared using chi2, Fisher exact test, or t test as appropriate.

197 , respectively (IPV versus control: Fisher's exact test P < 0.001).

198 was not statistically significant (Fisher's exact test P = .4241).

199 ore likely to be treated with UDCA (Fisher's exact test p = 0.0178) than those with a lower ratio.

200 ficant (OR = 3.69, 95%CI:2.02-6.73, Fisher's exact test P = 1.06E-06).

201 opathic focal childhood epilepsies (Fisher's exact test P = 2.1 x 10(-4)).

202 93 cases versus 32/65,046 controls; Fisher's exact test P = 2.83 x 10(-6), odds ratio = 26.2, 95% con

203 ntrols (OR = 5.08, 95%CI:2.81-9.20, Fisher's exact test P = 6.30E-11).

204 k from a single dairy (odds ratio, 8; Fisher exact test P value = .023).

205 led a significant burden for VPS16 (Fisher's exact test p value, 6.9 x 10(9) ).

206 secondary groups (11/49 vs 211/230: Fisher's exact test p<0.0001).

207 variants was significantly higher (Fisher's exact test P-value 0.0001) in cases (10/1318 = 0.75%) th

208 tion (44% of men versus 48% of women; Fisher exact test P=0.56; equivalence P=0.041).

209 9 of 3402) from May to November 2016 (Fisher exact test, P < .001; odds ratio [OR], 57; 95% CI, 9.8-2

210 .4% [47 of 739] vs 0.5% [12 of 2627]; Fisher exact test, P < .001; OR, 15.1; 95% CI, 7.9-33.4).

211 rysms (and 0/38 saccular aneurysms; Fisher's exact test, p < 0.001).

212 years and tumor thickness > 2.25 mm (Fisher exact test, P = .002 for both).

213 ore likely to be affected than men (Fisher's exact test, P = .0197).

214 l arm vs 92 (58%) in the control arm (Fisher exact test, P = .66).

215 distance (GD) <1.5% than in the GP (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.001).

216 ith protection against reinfection (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.002).

217 t 3 days on the numeric rating scale (Fisher exact test, P = 0.0026), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure

218 ) or the DNA-binding forkhead domain (Fisher exact test, P = 0.021).

219 colonizing AE cases versus controls (Fisher exact test, P = 0.03).

220 nts with type II diabetes mellitus (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.035).

221 ic HPV16 APOBEC3-induced mutations (Fisher's exact test, P = 6.2 x 10(-14)), and have a 30% lower non

222 ch aneuploidy was more common (69%; Fisher's exact test, P=0.0033).

223 ed with 38% in the wait-list group (Fisher's exact test, P=0.01).

224 reported with loss of asthma control (Fisher exact test; P = .003); overweight/obese children more of

225 loss (32/34 hearing loss ears; 94%)(Fisher's exact test; P= .005).

226 Statistical analyses included Fisher exact test, Pearson chi2 test, Mann-Whitney U test, and

227 seizures after presentation (P = .01; Fisher exact test), remote symptomatic seizures, and epilepsy (

228 matic status by using t tests and the Fisher exact test.ResultsA total of 44 participants (mean age,

229 tic regression, Welch t test, Z test, Fisher-exact test, Shapiro-Wilk test, and receiver operating ch

230 Fisher exact test showed that gender, age, marital status, occu

231 l analysis was performed by using the Fisher exact test, Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tes

232 erent statistical methods including Fisher's Exact Test, Student's t-test, ANOVA, non-parametric test

233 g descriptive statistic, chi(2) test, Fisher exact test, t test, and repeated-measures analysis of va

234 n R package that implements an unconditional exact test that is a more powerful version of the exact

235 Exact tests that include males are shown to have a bette

236 DPRP provides three methods: the Fisher's Exact Test, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and the BASE alg

237 test for continuous variables, with a Fisher exact test to compare incidence of port removal and deat

238 We used Fisher's exact test to compare unadjusted attack rates according

239 N-glycosylation motif, and performs Fisher's exact test to detect potential positive or negative amin

240 Whitney U exact tests, chi(2), and Fisher's exact tests to analyse the data.

241 'target', or 'non-target' followed by Fisher Exact Tests to assess enrichment of TFs and cofactors.

242 We used t tests, chi(2) tests, and Fisher's exact tests to compare baseline demographics across grou

243 We used Wilcoxon rank sum and Fischer exact tests to compare patients who died versus those st

244 d as-treated approaches, we performed Fisher exact tests to compare subsequent pregnancy outcomes by

245 nterovirus D68 using the two-tailed Fisher's exact test, two-sample unpaired t test, and Mann-Whitney

246 d with absence of disease (P=0.029, Fisher's exact test, two-sided, verified by permutation to estima

247 son of proportions was made using the Fisher exact test, using an alpha risk of 0.05 as clinically si

248 Because the 1-tailed P value from the Fisher exact test was <.001, which crossed the superiority boun

249 p with our prediction; and a modified Fisher Exact test was implemented to measure how well our predi

250 lared if the one-sided p value with Fisher's exact test was less than 0.2.

251 A Fisher exact test was performed to assess the statistical signi

252 A 2-tailed Fisher exact test was the statistical method used.

253 The Fisher exact test was used for categoric variables.

254 ed continuous data, and Chi-square or Fisher exact test was used for categorical data.

255 The Fisher exact test was used for categorical variables.

256 uantitative parameters, the chi(2) or Fisher exact test was used for qualitative parameters, and kapp

257 Fisher's exact test was used for the primary end point, and exten

258 Fisher exact test was used to analyze the association of testic

259 A 2-tailed Fisher exact test was used to assess for differences in ocular

260 Fisher exact test was used to compare categorical data.

261 The Fisher exact test was used to compare complication rates, and t

262 used to compare biopsy time, and the Fisher exact test was used to compare lesion type distribution

263 The 2-tailed Fisher exact test was used to compare outcomes between groups.

264 McNemar's test or Fisher exact test was used to compare proportions.

265 used to compare average values and Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportions.

266 The Fisher exact test was used to compare proportions; the Student

267 The Fisher exact test was used to compare rates of disease-related

268 Fisher exact test was used to compare the groups.

269 Fisher exact test was used to compare the proportion of CMV vir

270 Fisher's exact test was used to compare the proportion of those w

271 The Fisher exact test was used to compare the risks of stroke, deat

272 The Fisher exact test was used to compare the two groups.

273 Fisher's exact test was used to detect differences between instit

274 Fisher's exact test was used to determine difference in frequency

275 The Fisher exact test was used to determine differences between gro

276 Fisher exact test was used to examine the relationship between

277 Fisher's exact test was used to screen for association with VTE;

278 eria lactamica (P < 0.002) (2-sided Fisher's exact test) was more likely in the smaller, more densely

279 A significant difference (P<0.05, Fisher exact test) was observed regarding the p53 genotype freq

280 ANOVA and Fisher's exact test were conducted to examine the differences of

281 Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher exact test were used to assess group differences.

282 -Altman plot, kappa statistics, and Fisher's exact test were used to assess intra- and interobserver

283 bootstrapping and the McNemar test or Fisher exact test were used to compare sensitivity, specificity

284 llis H test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher exact test were used to compare the groups, with Bonferr

285 Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher exact test were used to look for statistically significa

286 The chi(2) test or Fisher exact test were used, as appropriate, for categorical da

287 Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher exact tests were performed.

288 Descriptive statistics and Fisher exact tests were used for analysis.

289 Pearson chi(2) and Fisher exact tests were used for analysis.

290 etric variables, while the chi(2) and Fisher exact tests were used for comparison of categoric data.

291 tabulations, chi-squared tests, and Fisher's exact tests were used to assess the influences of differ

292 Fisher exact tests were used to compare patients who tested pos

293 continuous variables and t-tests or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare treatment groups.

294 Fisher's exact tests were used to compare, by frailty status, per

295 chi2 Statistics and Fisher exact tests were used to evaluate differences in disease

296 n agents were made by using chi(2) or Fisher exact test, where appropriate.

297 ce of tumor response was evaluated by Fisher exact test, whereas differences in time to required next

298 analyzed with Pearson chi(2) tests or Fisher exact tests, while continuous variables were analyzed wi

299 ups were compared by using t test and Fisher exact test with a Bonferroni correction applied for mult

300 and CISs are also identified using Fisher's exact test with multiple testing correction.