ライフサイエンスコーパス: pairwise comparison

1 b, and 8.3 with ranibizumab (P>0.50 for each pairwise comparison).

2 , and uninfected controls (P < 0.05 for each pairwise comparison).

3 iod 2 and 26.3% in period 3 (P<.001 for each pairwise comparison).

4 health care utilization (P < 0.001 for each pairwise comparison).

5 areas than in urban areas (p<0.0001 for each pairwise comparison).

6 s one-way analysis of variance with post hoc pairwise comparisons).

7 324 452+/-30 152 pixels(2); P<0.0001 for all pairwise comparisons).

8 roups with much less overlap (P<0.01 for all pairwise comparisons).

9 e of genes (1.65-7.04 substitutions/10 kb in pairwise comparisons).

10 ) for artemether-lumefantrine (P<.05 for all pairwise comparisons).

11 lacement, and 54.7% with PTA (P<0.05 for all pairwise comparisons).

12 r in UM and CM than in HC (P <= 0.04 for all pairwise comparisons).

13 combination, respectively (P<0.0001 for all pairwise comparisons).

14 mg, 71.4%; 30 mg, 61.9%; P> or =.72 for all pairwise comparisons).

15 FFS managed care patients (85%) (P<.001 for pairwise comparisons).

16 characteristic curve, 0.65; p < 0.01 for all pairwise comparisons).

17 , 0.65; 95% CI, 0.63-0.66) (P < 0.01 for all pairwise comparisons).

18 and 8.6 letters, respectively (P > 0.10, for pairwise comparisons).

19 verse remodeling (n = 296, 58%) (P < .001 in pairwise comparisons).

20 aits according to their contribution to each pairwise comparison.

21 or PCR was higher than or equal to any other pairwise comparison.

22 pressed feature is up or down regulated in a pairwise comparison.

23 ay analysis of variance and Dunnett test for pairwise comparisons.

24 sed, followed by the Mann-Whitney U test for pairwise comparisons.

25 e-brain corrected), was followed by post hoc pairwise comparisons.

26 ve stool samples and kappa values for making pairwise comparisons.

27 e observation of concerted evolution in some pairwise comparisons.

28 ely compared by using the overall F test and pairwise comparisons.

29 ial drug effects were determined by means of pairwise comparisons.

30 co and tested in vivo, predominantly through pairwise comparisons.

31 at the remaining hospitals and for selected pairwise comparisons.

32 pretation and validity of studies relying on pairwise comparisons.

33 onymous substitutions, with dN/dS>14 in some pairwise comparisons.

34 (not including replicates) and over 100,000 pairwise comparisons.

35 no significant differences were detected in pairwise comparisons.

36 ues, and timepoints that result in dozens of pairwise comparisons.

37 on the patterns of incongruence observed in pairwise comparisons.

38 ed-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and pairwise comparisons.

39 e selection and pairwise divergence using 21 pairwise comparisons.

40 ector-transduced samples were analyzed by 16 pairwise comparisons.

41 26.7% of nucleotide sites are polymorphic in pairwise comparisons.

42 osite trend, however, was seen in intraclass pairwise comparisons.

43 with greater selectively than those that use pairwise comparisons.

44 hree assays, and each assay was subjected to pairwise comparisons.

45 rading bacteria were greater than 99% in all pairwise comparisons.

46 variance with Games-Howell post hoc test for pairwise comparisons.

47 tions can also be performed on any number of pairwise comparisons.

48 sitions/regions (DMPs/DMRs), across multiple pairwise comparisons.

49 ce in the c-indices of each score based upon pairwise comparisons.

50 P = .05 and 99.2% CIs adjusted for multiple pairwise comparisons.

51 soform switches exist and these are based on pairwise comparisons.

52 y means of logistic regression analysis with pairwise comparisons.

53 p<0.05) were followed up via Tukey-corrected pairwise comparisons.

54 sful, these approaches are mostly limited to pairwise comparisons.

55 7 to 9 months of follow-up data to 1 or more pairwise comparisons.

56 te matter indices was conducted, followed by pairwise comparisons.

57 ding a general framework for making multiple pairwise comparisons.

58 rrelation and variability were assessed with pairwise comparisons across all reagent-platform combina

59 nt lesions were significant (P < .01 for all pairwise comparisons after adjusting for multiplicity).

60 Although performing pairwise comparisons alone can provide physiologically r

61 ssively reducing the computational burden of pairwise comparison among large samples of sequences, an

62 By conducting three pairwise comparisons among European taurine, African tau

63 ogistic regression, analyzing all 7 possible pairwise comparisons among the subtypes, corresponding t

64 Pairwise comparison analyses identified 40 miRNAs and 31

65 No differences were found in primary pairwise comparison analyses of open-label augmentation

66 performed a network meta-analysis and direct pairwise comparison analysis of efficacy and safety outc

67 or calculating the statistics, replacing the pairwise comparison and counting processes with a data s

68 alysis of variance with Bonferroni-corrected pairwise comparison and Pearson correlation were used fo

69 Both pairwise comparison and phylogenetic inference indicate

70 Using robust, pairwise comparisons and a global dataset, we show that

71 ne due to multiple testing involving several pairwise comparisons and the second due to falsely decla

72 Using pairwise comparisons and weighted gene coexpression netw

73 rather than O(NM(2)) as expected from naive pairwise comparison, and also a fast algorithm, empirica

74 DEGs were submitted to pairwise comparisons, and selected DEGs were validated b

75 ing characteristic curve (AUC) estimates and pairwise comparisons, and the agreement of gallstone siz

76 tructurally conserved repeats that, based on pairwise comparisons, are unconserved at the sequence le

77 test recurrence score (ODxRS), and post hoc pairwise comparisons assessed ODxRS means by using imagi

78 ng ANCOVA F tests and Tukey-Kramer-corrected pairwise comparisons.At 24 mo, the LNS-LNS group had sig

79 licated, and their uniqueness confirmed with pairwise comparisons (based on Mash distances) between A

80 ent qRT-PCR experiment using 2(-DeltaCT) and pairwise comparison-based (geNorm) analyses.

81 sliding window analysis and observed in two pairwise comparisons, better accounted for by localised

82 We performed pairwise comparison between concurrent measures of invas

83 A pairwise comparison between patients treated with FU+LV

84 There was no difference in the pairwise comparison between patients who received FU+LV

85 his process is investigated that is based on pairwise comparison between two individuals.

86 ficients > or =0.40; P values <.001) for all pairwise comparisons between beta-blocker use at admissi

87 CL) and navigating the space of all possible pairwise comparisons between cell types to find genes wh

88 ts by an approximate method that is based on pairwise comparisons between each single sequence and th

89 ourteen (p < 0.05) to 17 (p < 0.1) of the 28 pairwise comparisons between eight global regions are st

90 Pairwise comparisons between Kunitz and amino-terminal d

91 ication that automates the process of making pairwise comparisons between large numbers of phylogenet

92 Pairwise comparisons between local and exotic germplasms

93 Our pairwise comparisons between numts suggest that most hum

94 The clustering is based on analysis of all pairwise comparisons between protein sequences.

95 Analysis of the 45 possible pairwise comparisons between samples found that 100% of

96 aviour and brain biochemistry frequently use pairwise comparisons between sham-treated and -untreated

97 Pairwise comparisons between the 3 treatment groups were

98 mption using patient-controlled analgesia in pairwise comparisons between the 4 groups (multiplicity-

99 Bonnferoni analysis was used to assess pairwise comparisons between the groups.

100 Pairwise comparisons between the metformin and nonmetfor

101 Interestingly, pairwise comparisons between these 2 patients' C2-V3 env

102 'contrasts', i.e. instances of differential pairwise comparisons between two sets of biological repl

103 rebral volumes (overall F(2,288) = 6.65; all pairwise comparisons Bonferroni corrected, -5.8%; P =.00

104 For multiple pairwise comparisons, Bonferroni correction was performe

105 relapsing multiple sclerosis have focused on pairwise comparisons but the effectiveness of different

106 Pairwise comparison by nodal status showed that when com

107 In post hoc pairwise comparisons controlling for multiple comparison

108 Pairwise comparisons demonstrated a significant differen

109 Pairwise comparisons demonstrated significant difference

110 nd two of the three were imitative, enabling pairwise comparisons designed to highlight commonalities

111 Pairwise comparisons did not reveal any statistically si

112 ntial expression for biologically meaningful pairwise comparisons-estimated using consistent methodol

113 te (r) is at least approximately 10(5), the "pairwise comparison estimator" of T(MRCA) that derives f

114 stimator" of T(MRCA) is more biased than the pairwise comparison estimator, having low bias only for

115 d 10.8% with surgical bypass (P<0.05 for all pairwise comparison except PTA versus stent).

116 , 41 eyes; NIU, 144 eyes; P <= 0.050 for all pairwise comparisons except between normal and questiona

117 udy drugs, respectively (P< or =.008 for all pairwise comparisons, except amodiaquine plus artesunate

118 uernus, this snapper had several significant pairwise comparisons (F(ST)) clustered around the middle

119 propriate omnibus tests followed by post hoc pairwise comparisons; false discovery rate correction wa

120 polynomial in nature and thus faster, making pairwise comparisons feasible for significantly larger n

121 Pairwise comparison for each gene is not appropriate wit

122 (P = 0.036) and numerically greater for the pairwise comparison for ribavirin at 1200 mg/day (P = 0.

123 interferon alfa-2a (180 microg/week) for the pairwise comparison for ribavirin at 1600 mg/day (P = 0.

124 Pairwise comparisons for mean total overall clerkship gr

125 Using a transducer-based pairwise comparison function, we determine optimal phasi

126 sus group 1 and significant differences in a pairwise comparison (group 3 or group 4 versus group 1).

127 Single pairwise comparisons, however, allow the discovery of co

128 ly more diverged than intronic INE-1 in both pairwise comparisons, implying the presence of either ne

129 expressed transcripts were detected based on pairwise comparison in the three libraries (0_DAP, 7_DAP

130 ces were confirmed in cage studies where, in pairwise comparisons in the absence of other floral cues

131 Still, in all the direct pairwise comparisons in the same medium, the catalysts w

132 Pairwise comparisons in YGTSS total scores after Bonferr

133 The hazard ratios associated with all pairwise comparisons included 1 for all key cardiovascul

134 Pairwise comparisons indicated: (1) the mean melanopsin-

135 forces consistent structure information from pairwise comparisons into consensus structures.

136 ease, an efficient alternative is to cluster pairwise comparisons into groups and identify seeds for

137 7; LF: -1.43 +/- 0.27; F = 4.616, P = 0.012; pairwise comparisons: LGI compared with HGI, P = 1.000;

138 ssion microarray profiles indicated that, in pairwise comparisons, low DLC1 expression occurred frequ

139 sity regions (7 versus 45 per 100 000, P-for-pairwise-comparisons <0.001) and increase in TAVR in-hos

140 ach input parameter is generated utilizing a pairwise comparison matrix.

141 Graph clustering enables a broader range of pairwise comparison measures to be used to assess aptame

142 ct more subtle similarity relationships than pairwise comparison methods.

143 database bias, the results from such simple pairwise comparisons might be misleading.

144 A pairwise comparison of 2 signatures was performed using

145 Here, we perform a pairwise comparison of 90,000 putative binding pockets d

146 first constructed a novel gene network via a pairwise comparison of all yeast genes' Ontology Fingerp

147 erating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, pairwise comparison of areas under the ROC curves (A(z))

148 ificant difference test were used to perform pairwise comparison of brain regions in terms of each pe

149 Pairwise comparison of CTC subpopulations longitudinally

150 Pairwise comparison of data vectors represents a large p

151 d and standalone application that performs a pairwise comparison of each gene present in user-selecte

152 Pairwise comparison of hospital quality based on TMPM-IC

153 ion and quality of genome assemblies through pairwise comparison of k-mers present in both input read

154 ed of a matrix of cells, each representing a pairwise comparison of mapped probe data for two linkage

155 fraction of compounds as evidenced through a pairwise comparison of molecules that were otherwise ide

156 sequences, thus making it applicable for the pairwise comparison of more distantly related sequences.

157 A pairwise comparison of normal, adrenocortical adenomas a

158 otation analysis to carry out a quantitative pairwise comparison of PAS quaternary structures, which

159 Pairwise comparison of real-time PCR between multiplex a

160 veloped ParsEval, a software application for pairwise comparison of sets of gene structure annotation

161 In a pairwise comparison of seven closely related species pai

162 Diagrams for pairwise comparison of species can be produced that show

163 Mean pairwise comparison of the 14 alleles indicates moderate

164 Pairwise comparison of the 35 amino acids showed 61% seq

165 sed for visual differentiability by means of pairwise comparison of the attenuation- and phase-contra

166 Pairwise comparison of the DHPS sequences demonstrated 6

167 The web server provides pairwise comparison of the dynamics of all proteins incl

168 Pairwise comparison of the full-length S, M, and L genom

169 ce, and the Mann-Whitney U test was used for pairwise comparison of the groups.

170 (*)1 and C(S)1, extensions of statistics for pairwise comparison of the joint k-tuple content of all

171 utility of the toolkit using annotation of a pairwise comparison of the mouse MHC class II and class

172 text "reuse" by researchers via a systematic pairwise comparison of the text content of all articles

173 However, a pairwise comparison of the TT2 arms suggested a lower in

174 The pairwise comparison of these modalities showed no statis

175 Pairwise comparison of whole plastid and draft nuclear g

176 Genome-scale evolutionary analyses based on pairwise comparisons of 1,197 orthologous sequences betw

177 computational speedup allowed us to conduct pairwise comparisons of 1197 complete genomes (780 eukar

178 istributions of nucleotide differences among pairwise comparisons of all DNA sequences in the sample.

179 egions (EBRs; N = 1064) were identified from pairwise comparisons of all genomes.

180 Pairwise comparisons of amino acid identities and phylog

181 Pairwise comparisons of amino acid sequences of the corr

182 For each dose of RVX-208, individual pairwise comparisons of apoA-I changes with placebo, the

183 Pairwise comparisons of areas under ROC curves (AUCs) fr

184 astric band groups, respectively (P < 0.005, pairwise comparisons of band groups with sham).

185 All pairwise comparisons of beta diversity values between gr

186 Pairwise comparisons of cardiovascular MR imaging measur

187 In pairwise comparisons of complete VP1 sequences, enterovi

188 Pairwise comparisons of density estimations at different

189 Through pairwise comparisons of different isolates we discovered

190 Pairwise comparisons of different treatment exposure gro

191 Pairwise comparisons of disagreement in phylogenetic dat

192 Nevertheless, pairwise comparisons of diversity of nontarget insects i

193 fourfold degenerate sites) in two different pairwise comparisons of Drosophila (D. melanogaster vs.

194 (baseline colonic transit as covariate) with pairwise comparisons of each dose vs placebo.

195 s examined in-hospital mortality in the four pairwise comparisons of each trial drug and its control

196 In pairwise comparisons of eight bz haplotypes, the percent

197 Using an analysis of complete pairwise comparisons of expression profiles among all of

198 d 31.3%, respectively (P = 0.001, P = 0.381, pairwise comparisons of gastric band vs. sham and gastri

199 Classified on the basis of significant pairwise comparisons of genotype means, 181 of these 305

200 with Bonferroni correction was performed in pairwise comparisons of group PCD values.

201 Further, pairwise comparisons of GVP profiles with 8 SNPs demonst

202 Pairwise comparisons of homologous mesophilic and thermo

203 Among 1809 participants, all pairwise comparisons of incidence of virologic failure o

204 es of exact agreement (for C & M values) for pairwise comparisons of individual patient values were 5

205 Pairwise comparisons of individuals with high-impact inh

206 ncompatibilities were detected by performing pairwise comparisons of markers on different chromosomes

207 Pairwise comparisons of mean ADCs for each parameter (no

208 Pairwise comparisons of median price per ounce on the ba

209 The TER is fully supported by the pairwise comparisons of MERs using 106 manually segmente

210 Pairwise comparisons of nonsynonymous and synonymous dis

211 Therefore, datasets from 74 studies from pairwise comparisons of organic vs. nonorganic farming s

212 with one or more fast-evolving regions from pairwise comparisons of orthologous genes.

213 Pairwise comparisons of orthologous human and mouse gene

214 and SNAP (a parsimony-based NG86 model) made pairwise comparisons of orthologs in murids (rat and mou

215 we use co-evolution-based methods, involving pairwise comparisons of protein phylogenetic trees, to p

216 Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90%

217 analysed the substitution patterns by making pairwise comparisons of sequence variation at the putati

218 In comparative biology, pairwise comparisons of species or genes (terminal taxa)

219 Thus, pairwise comparisons of species sharing a recent common

220 Pairwise comparisons of the 44 partial L1 gene sequences

221 In pairwise comparisons of the four genotypes, the number o

222 ilcoxon signed rank test was used to perform pairwise comparisons of the MR angiographic techniques.

223 mega = dN/dS) and the sequence distance d in pairwise comparisons of the same gene from different spe

224 inal layers to distinguish between all three pairwise comparisons of the severity in DR (NoDR vs NPDR

225 Through pairwise comparisons of the strains, we identified an av

226 Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to assess pairwise comparisons of the various PI concentrations to

227 Pairwise comparisons of their distribution in rat, mouse

228 he mode of action of these chemicals, simple pairwise comparisons of treated and untreated samples ar

229 These pairwise comparisons of wild-type versus mutant rootless

230 rarchical logistic regression modeling using pairwise comparisons (overweight, BMI: 25-29.9; mildly o

231 roup when compared with the essential group (pairwise comparison, P = .002).

232 nd the controls (F6,160 = 2.4; P = .032; all pairwise comparisons, P < .002).

233 In the pairwise comparisons, PRN bevacizumab compared with mont

234 results are found for the Wright-Fisher and Pairwise Comparison processes.

235 en-population similarity values (Sb) for all pairwise comparisons ranged from 0.47 to 0.51.

236 Pairwise comparisons (ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, vs sham and l

237 Pairwise comparison revealed that dominants' AR mRNA exp

238 Pairwise comparison revealed that the quaternary ammoniu

239 The use of statistical pairwise comparison revealed that there were trace impur

240 Pairwise comparisons revealed average numbers of nucleot

241 Pairwise comparisons revealed significant differences be

242 Pairwise comparisons revealed significantly lower latera

243 Post hoc pairwise comparisons revealed statistically significant

244 Planned pairwise comparisons revealed that from months 4 to 12,

245 Post hoc log-rank pairwise comparisons revealed that lesions initially tre

246 Post hoc Tukey pairwise comparisons revealed that the short-short homoz

247 Pairwise comparisons revealed that the trackball was sig

248 Pairwise comparisons revealed the trackball to be signif

249 Pairwise comparison reveals a strong negative correlatio

250 ve game dynamics such as imitate-the-best or pairwise comparison rules, whereas moody conditional coo

251 Pairwise comparison showed a significant difference betw

252 Pairwise comparison showed mean resting energy expenditu

253 The pairwise comparisons showed significant differences with

254 Pairwise comparisons showed that 9 and 23 taxa differed

255 Pairwise comparisons showed that the diagnostic performa

256 Adjusted pairwise comparisons showed that the relative annual inc

257 Pairwise comparisons showed that the scores from the 28-

258 (*)2, C(S)2 and C(geo)2, averages of sums of pairwise comparison statistics.

259 Pairwise comparisons suggested that coxsackie A11 and A1

260 significant difference test, and appropriate pairwise comparison tests for independent samples were c

261 bout recombination, and that when just those pairwise comparisons that are informative about recombin

262 In adjusted pairwise comparisons, the annual rate of increase was gr

263 In pairwise comparisons, the LNS group had greater mean bir

264 In pairwise comparisons, the risk of the primary outcome wa

265 ugh these statistics are well understood for pairwise comparisons, there has been little success deve

266 hput ranking of whole docking simulations by pairwise comparison to experimental outputs.

267 imary end point was OS and was determined by pairwise comparison to the reference arm, with a 90% cha

268 e evidently higher than v2- and v3-ARV (each pairwise comparison to v1-AVR yields P < 0.01); in contr

269 Pairwise comparisons to a close relative, the sibling sp

270 These cell lines will facilitate pairwise comparisons to identify FSHD-specific differenc

271 and comparing lists of DEEs across multiple pairwise comparisons, typically done by writing custom c

272 Pairwise comparison using OPLS-DA also displaying good r

273 classification (classification ranking), by pairwise comparison using the Elo rating method (compari

274 Pairwise comparisons using conservative acceptance crite

275 A pairwise comparison was then performed to estimate the r

276 indicated that the estimated fold-change in pairwise comparisons was the same using either linear mi

277 Hazard ratios for the three pairwise comparisons were as follows: for low versus hig

278 All P values resulting from pairwise comparisons were corrected with the Bonferroni

279 Pairwise comparisons were fit using 2-sample t test.

280 Pairwise comparisons were made by using the Tukey-Kramer

281 When significant differences were detected, pairwise comparisons were made using Fisher's exact test

282 Pairwise comparisons were made using unadjusted Cox Prop

283 After propensity-matched pairwise comparisons were made, survival after all TCS-V

284 Pairwise comparisons were not significant, although the

285 Pairwise comparisons were performed between mice of the

286 atistics, for each of the outcome variables, pairwise comparisons were performed using the Wilcoxon s

287 7; VI, 27.0; and STP, 28.8, P = 0.001; Tukey pairwise comparisons were statistically significant for

288 None of the pairwise comparisons were statistically significant.

289 re generated using treatment effect, for all pairwise comparisons, where WMD < 0 favors the column-de

290 Pairwise comparison with each commercial system serving

291 placebo, with use of significance testing of pairwise comparisons with a cutoff of p=0.05.

292 The results were similar in pairwise comparisons with the plus CBT strategy being su

293 Pairwise comparisons with the Tukey honestly significant

294 ient samples showed good correlation in most pairwise comparisons, with some showing poorer correlati

295 ts (P < .001), as well as between cohorts in pairwise comparisons, with the most significant gains in

296 d from -0.286 to 0.478) was observed through pairwise comparison within different kits.

297 he user can filter and compare any number of pairwise comparisons within a single A-Lister differenti

298 Additionally, users can filter the pairwise comparisons within the input files by fold chan

299 macular degeneration, respectively, with all pairwise comparisons yielding statistically significant

300 er DCGS rate than the three ACR groups (each pairwise comparison yields P<0.05).