ライフサイエンスコーパス: two-sided

1 breast cancer-specific mortality (tests were two-sided).

2 r patients randomized to MOPP/ABVD (P = .45, two-sided).

3 r patients randomized to MOPP/ABVD (P = .09, two-sided).

4 All P values are two sided.

5 All statistical tests were two sided.

6 idence intervals; all statistical tests were two sided.

7 95% CIs and P values were two sided.

8 All P values were two sided.

9 All Ps were two sided.

10 for analyses and all statistical tests were two-sided.

11 All statistical tests were two-sided.

12 istic regression, and statistical tests were two-sided.

13 Log-rank P values are two-sided.

14 All tests of significance were two-sided.

15 Statistical tests were two-sided.

16 All p values were two-sided.

17 reatment variables on CAM use; P values were two-sided.

18 ciated pain; all tests for significance were two-sided.

19 Today, we recognize that oxidative stress is two-sided.

20 y versus control, based on our predetermined two-sided 0.10 significance level (p = 0.09).

21 Two-sided 0.30 significance level was specified (80% pow

22 ifference in 5-year FFS of 64% versus 74% at two-sided .05 significance level.

23 timates of SVR12 and relapse rates and their two-sided 90% CI (Clopper-Pearson method) were provided.

24 roup (31%; one-sided 95% CI lower bound 21%; two-sided 90% CI 21-43), 19 of 54 in IGF-1R-positive bon

25 roup (35%; one-sided 95% CI lower bound 24%; two-sided 90% CI 24-47), and 21 of 54 in the IGF-1R-nega

26 roup (39%, one-sided 95% CI lower bound 28%; two-sided 90% CI 28-51) were progression free at 12 week

27 p vs 41.7 QALY days for the OSC group), with two-sided 90% CI of -12.7 to 3.3.

28 Non-inferiority was concluded if the lower two-sided 90% CI of the seroconversion rate difference b

29 D Questionnaire at 2 weeks was -0.19 points (two-sided 90% CI, -0.33 to -0.05) in favor of the CRP-gu

30 oup, a difference of -0.3 percentage points (two-sided 90% CI, -2.7 to 2.2), a result that met the no

31 10+/-0.25 and 0.03+/-0.28 (difference, 0.07; two-sided 90% CI, 0.03 to 0.10); the difference in the r

32 Eleven patients (23.9%; two-sided 90% CI, 14% to 37%) survived progression free

33 at least 6 months, and five patients (10.9%; two-sided 90% CI, 4% to 22%) had partial responses.

34 eriority margin of 3 percentage points and a two-sided 90% confidence interval.

35 nisone group (difference from control 11.0%; two-sided 90% confidence limit, -11.0% to 32.9%; P=0.01

36 nisone group (difference from control 16.4%; two-sided 90% confidence limit, -4.3% to 37.1%; P=0.002

37 1.51, demonstrating lack of equivalence, and two-sided 95 percent confidence interval of 1.01 to 1.57

38 -sided 95% CI 4.52; p(non-inferiority)=0.65; two-sided 95% CI 1.27-4.81; p=0.0008); the criterion for

39 is was upgraded to either ADH or DCIS (exact two-sided 95% CI = 11.4%, 36.4%).

40 CI 2.3-14.6) and, as the lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI around the treatment difference was pos

41 hat of active yaws if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the difference in rates was higher

42 fosamil was defined as a lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the difference in the proportion of

43 eriority was shown if the upper limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the local relapse hazard ratio [HR]

44 rior to infliximab if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was greate

45 rity was concluded if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was greate

46 Non-inferiority was based on the two-sided 95% CI of the difference in the proportion of

47 rity was concluded if the lower bound of the two-sided 95% CI was greater than -10%.

48 oups and was shown if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI was greater than -12.5%.

49 ute risk difference, -4.3 percentage points; two-sided 95% CI, -13.0 to 4.4).

50 Two-sided 95% CIs for the incidence rate of transmission

51 sensitivity, specificity, and F1 score with two-sided 95% CIs.

52 The upper limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval for the estimate of th

53 ty was established if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval was -1.0 g per decilit

54 hazards models were used to estimate HRs and two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the associat

55 TB were quantified by relative risk (RR) and two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from log-binomi

56 te differences and relative risks, including two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

57 A two-sided 95% Wilson score CI was derived for each end p

58 ty was established if the lower limit of the two-sided 97.5% confidence interval was -1.0 g per decil

59 acid segment of Brf1 is shown to serve as a two-sided adhesive surface, with the side chains project

60 y occlusion and specific sites of occlusion (two-sided alpha = .01).

61 by ibandronate from 75% to 79.5% by using a two-sided alpha = .05 and 1-beta of 80%.

62 zation could be detected with 90% power with two-sided alpha = .05.

63 ed per-group sample size was 571 (80% power; two-sided alpha = 0.05), compared with 2,436 patients ne

64 a 10% 24-week decrease in visceral AT (VAT, two-sided alpha = 0.05).

65 90% in all patients and in those with COPD (two-sided alpha = 0.05).

66 versus 5.5 months, P = 0.064, pre-specified two-sided alpha = 0.2).

67 With a two-sided alpha = 5% and beta = 20%, 645 ER-positive pat

68 eat analysis stratified by dose of RT at the two-sided alpha = 5%.

69 tect an rPFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.6 with a two-sided alpha error of .05 and 80% power to detect a t

70 t physical performance tests) were done at a two-sided alpha level of 0.05.

71 rformance tests were done at a pre-specified two-sided alpha level of 0.1.

72 dpoint was progression-free survival using a two-sided alpha level of 0.2 and statistical power of 0.

73 The study was designed with 80% power (5% two-sided alpha level) to detect an increase in 5-year F

74 versus placebo (intent-to-treat population, two-sided alpha of .05).

75 ct a difference using a log-rank test with a two-sided alpha of .05.

76 sided alpha of 0.025, and superiority with a two-sided alpha of 0.025.

77 25% reduction in all-cause mortality with a two-sided alpha of 0.05.

78 This study was designed with a two-sided alpha of 0.2 and powered at 78% for the primar

79 a significant difference at the prespecified two-sided alpha of 0.2 in median progression-free surviv

80 a randomised phase 2 screening design with a two-sided alpha of 0.20 (wherein p<0.20 designates a pos

81 n this Article at 77% data maturity, using a two-sided alpha of 0.95%.

82 The two-sided alpha was prespecified at 0.025.

83 nt treatment modality at or before 24 weeks (two-sided alpha=0.05 for superiority of ranibizumab 0.2

84 via a sequential multiple-testing procedure (two sided, alpha=0.05).

85 rocedure to enable directional decisions for two-sided alternatives.

86 two-sample continuity-corrected Z tests with two-sided alternatives.

87 All statistical tests were two sided and unadjusted for multiple comparisons.

88 fication, and linear regression analysis and two-sided and two-sample t tests were performed.

89 chi(2) Test for trend (two sided) and linear regression were used to assess tre

90 All analyses were two sided, and P values less than .10 were deemed signif

91 tistical tests used in the analysis were all two-sided, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statist

92 condensins that perform one-sided, symmetric two-sided, and asymmetric two-sided extrusion.

93 groups in the intention-to-treat population (two-sided assessment), based on local evaluation of tumo

94 drugs but did not reach significance (P=.11, two-sided chi2).

95 plus fosbretabulin (hazard ratio, 0.69; 90% two-sided CI, 0.47 to 1.00; one-sided P = .05).

96 not detected by either radiologist (31%, 95% two-sided CI: 9, 61), increasing the potential sensitivi

97 Two-sided CIs and one-sided P values for planned compari

98 udy duration, compared between groups with a two-sided Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test.

99 Statistical analyses based on two-sided confidence intervals (CIs) were performed by u

100 LS-based feature analysis provides a general two-sided dimensionality reduction that reveals encoding

101 One suggests that two-sided events are the norm but are "hidden" as hetero

102 h mlh1Delta and msh2Delta, the proportion of two-sided events is significantly decreased relative to

103 duplex repair, the first model predicts that two-sided events would be revealed at the expense of one

104 the DSB site or Msh2p/Mlh1p actively promote two-sided events.

105 MSH2 or MLH1 and analyzing the proportion of two-sided events.

106 A two-sided exact 95% CI was calculated to estimate the pr

107 Fisher's two-sided exact test confirmed that these two variants a

108 In mixtures of condensins I and II, coupling two-sided extrusion and stable chromatin binding by cond

109 e-sided, symmetric two-sided, and asymmetric two-sided extrusion.

110 Two-sided Fisher exact and paired t tests were used for

111 37 subjects without PFO, 5 had an ASA (1.1%, two-sided Fisher exact test, p = 0.028).

112 chi(2) test to adjust for sex and age, and a two-sided Fisher exact test.

113 pression at week 4 (38% vs. 13%, P=0.04 by a two-sided Fisher's exact test in the A5340 trial; and 80

114 e A5340 trial; and 80% vs. 13%, P<0.001 by a two-sided Fisher's exact test in the NIH trial) but the

115 h a response in measurable disease (P=.0369, two-sided Fisher's exact test).

116 We clarify the one-sided and two-sided hypotheses, and discuss some issues regarding

117 Two-sided independent sample t tests assessed any signif

118 mitigating the effects of risk behavior; for two-sided interactions, it is essential to combine proph

119 increasing the risks for all; (iv) there is two-sided irreversibility; if nothing is done and the pr

120 Data analysis included two-sided Kaplan-Meier, Mann-Whitney, and Fischer exact

121 Two-sided linear and Pearson chi2 tests were calculated

122 Overall survival was compared by two-sided log-rank and Wilcoxon tests.

123 treatment groups was 0.64 (95% CI 0.44-0.93; two-sided log-rank p=0.016).

124 red with M-CAVI (13.5 v 9 months) based on a two-sided log-rank test at error rates alpha = .05 and b

125 ntralateral breast cancer, 0.66; P=0.01 by a two-sided log-rank test stratified according to nodal st

126 ntal arms were 11.2 and 11.0 months (P =.33, two-sided log-rank test), and survival at 1 year was 45%

127 rsus 9.3 months in the control arm (P =.020, two-sided log-rank test).

128 a significantly increased survival (P=.0005, two-sided log-rank test).

129 Meier survival curves were compared with the two-sided log-rank test.

130 Based on a two-sided logistic regression analysis, stratified for a

131 Theory indicates that symmetric two-sided loop extrusion can achieve such compaction, bu

132 Modeling assuming two-sided loop extrusion reproduces key features of chro

133 cterial chromosomal arms, as can be done by 'two-sided' loop extruders.

134 o healthy elderly controls (p = 8.27x10(-3), two-sided Mann-Whitney test).

135 A two-sided Mann-Whitney U test was used to detect differe

136 Two-sided Mann-Whitney U test, independent samples t tes

137 for MR imaging and US and compared by using two-sided McNemar test or the score statistics specified

138 ity and specificity were compared by using a two-sided McNemar test.

139 ir-499 rs3746444) and cancer risk by using a two-sided meta-analytic approach.

140 h mastectomy, testing for significance using two-sided methods.

141 A two-sided model for DNA is employed to analyze fluctuati

142 SMC complexes in vivo constitute effectively two-sided motors or exhibit biased loading and propose r

143 This spacer is a two-sided mounting tape, 0.8 mm thick, with a small disc

144 and left breasts were investigated by using two-sided multivariate analysis of variance with interac

145 x) and its high-efficiency conversion on the two-sided nitride polar surfaces, which are supplied wit

146 erapy, for a difference of 7.8 (2.9 to 12.8; two-sided nominal p=0.0020).

147 ached]; hazard ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.44-0.97; two-sided nominal p=0.029).

148 ssessment, and the results are provided with two-sided, nominal p values.

149 ficance was calculated with the Mann-Whitney two-sided nonparametric test.

150 ferences were analyzed by using a Wilcoxon's two-sided normal approximation test that was also adjust

151 ng residence time and the ability to perform two-sided (not necessarily symmetric) extrusion.

152 rely on implicit assumptions that tests are two-sided or yield continuously distributed p-values.

153 not those receiving chemotherapy (Wald test, two-sided P > 0.05).

154 aster with bosutinib compared with imatinib (two-sided P < .001 for both).

155 ared with imatinib (27%; 95% CI, 22% to 33%; two-sided P < .001).

156 versus Rd patients over 18 treatment cycles (two-sided P < .001).

157 tically after two years of latent infection (two-sided p < 0.001, assuming an 18 h generation time eq

158 s contained more genes than control samples (two-sided p = .0002).

159 group, with 95% confidence from 1.9 to 15.6, two-sided P = .0009.

160 A (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89; two-sided P = .006).

161 erlotinib (HR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.85; two-sided P = .006); and in patients with KRAS wild-type

162 espectively (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.88; two-sided P = .01).

163 ard ratio [HR] = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.91; two-sided P = .012); in patients with KRAS wild-type tum

164 n = 118) and 35 months for placebo (n = 125; two-sided P = .013).

165 ) of live-born infants collected in Denmark (two-sided p = .023, odds ratio = 7.76 [95% confidence in

166 erlotinib (HR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.99; two-sided P = .043).

167 S + RT + CT (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.99; two-sided P = .043).

168 + RT + CT, (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.99; two-sided P = .044).

169 was 73% for low-dose RT versus 56% for OBS (two-sided P = .05).

170 ratio [HR], 0.679 [95% CI, 0.459 to 1.005]; two-sided P = .0518).

171 two-sided P = .06), and time to progression (two-sided P = .06) also favored RT.

172 Failure-free survival (two-sided P = .06), and time to progression (two-sided P

173 3; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.07; one-sided P = .055; two-sided P = .11 [predefined significance level of .10,

174 lomustine (HR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.08; two-sided P = .16) versus lomustine based on independent

175 erlotinib (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.13; two-sided P = .205).

176 zard ratio [HR], 0.75, 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.23; two-sided P = .254), disease-free survival (DFS; HR, 0.7

177 16% (n = four of 25) in EL-treated patients (two-sided P = .263).

178 verall response rate was 71.9% versus 65.6% (two-sided P = .57) for CE+V and CE+P, respectively.

179 %) versus imatinib (68%; 95% CI, 62% to 74%; two-sided P = .601); therefore, the study did not achiev

180 ard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.50; two-sided P = .90) or cediranib in combination with lomu

181 Positive spatial autocorrelation (two-sided p = 0.001) revealed the similarity in influenz

182 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 0.87; two-sided P = 0.001).

183 us group were alive and free of progression (two-sided P = 0.002, which met the prespecified signific

184 NHL (7 cases vs. 0 controls, OR = infinite; two-sided p = 0.02), but dermatomyositis was absent in c

185 first sextile was 0.27 +/- 0.07 (se) years (two-sided p = 0.05).

186 group and 14.4% in the talactoferrin group (two-sided p = 0.052), representing a 12.5% absolute and

187 ratio for death, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.07; two-sided P = 0.20, which did not meet the prespecified

188 the Rd group, HR 0.709, 95% CI 0.524-0.959; two-sided p value 0.025).

189 a two-sided P value of .058 with an observed two-sided P value of .003 favoring temsirolimus.

190 boundary at this analysis corresponded to a two-sided P value of .058 with an observed two-sided P v

191 al curves for these two populations yields a two-sided P value of 0.0272.

192 nous testosterone and their controls (with a two-sided p value of 0.05 and a power of 80%) would requ

193 n the placebo group (Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel two-sided p value of 0.273 in favor of ART-123, which me

194 A two-sided P value of less than .05 was considered to ind

195 the forced expiratory volume in 1 second; a two-sided P value of less than 0.025 denoted statistical

196 A two-sided P value with alpha = .05 was considered to sho

197 ue to a relatively low sample size (N = 68), two-sided p values < 0.1 were considered statistically s

198 Two-sided P values <0.05 were considered significant.We

199 Results with two-sided P values of.05 or less were statistically sign

200 -squares mean difference 41% [95% CI 32-50], two-sided p<0.0001).

201 in favour of vosoritide (95% CI [1.22-1.93]; two-sided p<0.0001).

202 8.3% (95% confidence interval, 26.0 to 48.6; two-sided P<0.001) lower with iptacopan than with placeb

203 and increased transcript levels (all r>0.84, two-sided P<0.05).

204 5, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13, 9.99; two-sided p(interaction) = 0.035).

205 A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically si

206 For i = 1, 2, ..., p, let pi(i) denote the two-sided P-value associated with the ith feature Z-scor

207 rved and predicted cancers were compared and two-sided P-values calculated.

208 ver, a specified efficacy-stopping boundary (two-sided P=0.00028) was not crossed.

209 ne [4%] of 27 patients in the placebo group; two-sided p=0.0003 and p=0.0001, respectively).

210 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62 [95% CI 0.48-0.81]; two-sided p=0.0005); median overall survival 45.1 months

211 -9.3]; hazard ratio 0.63 [95% CI 0.47-0.85], two-sided p=0.0018).

212 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 0.88; two-sided P=0.002).

213 -not reached) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 two-sided p=0.0023).

214 9-0.84) in favour of the capivasertib group (two-sided p=0.0044; one-sided log rank test p=0.0018).

215 zard ratio for death 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.98, two-sided p=0.0324).

216 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.97; two-sided P=0.04).

217 e control group; HR 0.97 [95% CI 0.80-1.21]; two-sided p=0.80).

218 nadjusted odds ratio 1.00, 95% CI 0.43-2.31; two-sided p=0.99).

219 e control group (HR 1.00 [95% CI 0.78-1.28], two-sided p=0.99).

220 week regimen versus 71.4% with CAF (P = .10, two-sided; P = .05, one-sided).

221 week regimen versus 62.7% with CAF (P = .19, two-sided; P = .095, one-sided).

222 Two-sided paired sample t tests were used to compare cha

223 A two-sided paired Student t test was used for statistical

224 y using region-of-interest analysis with the two-sided paired Student t test.

225 Two-sided paired Student t tests were used for statistic

226 pt in the loop and the use of MLL primers in two-sided PCR.

227 n between age and ICD treatment on survival (two-sided posterior tail probability of no interaction <

228 age and ICD treatment on rehospitalization (two-sided posterior tail probability of no interaction 0

229 e performed with statistical software with a two-sided Pvalue of .05 to calculate Pearson correlation

230 el captures the distinction between one- and two-sided risk behavior change.

231 at includes financial rewards and penalties (two-sided risk).

232 Our data suggest two-sided roles of SOCS proteins in retina.

233 We present a two-sided search model in which individuals from two gro

234 A simple model for these two-sided separations is the dynamical system dX/dt = X(

235 We used a two-sided sequential design with death from any cause as

236 primary efficacy hypothesis was tested at a two-sided significance level (type I error) of 0.05 usin

237 eader-specific performance levels by using a two-sided significance level of .0294.

238 tio of 0.645 with approximately 85% power at two-sided significance level of .05.

239 ented here was protocol-specified and used a two-sided significance level of 0.001 and a p value at o

240 sample size 2355), with 83% power, at the 5% two-sided significance level.

241 In this superiority trial with two-sided significance testing, we aimed to compare the

242 n to exhibit risk behavior change whereas in two-sided situations (e.g. AIDS/HIV) it is necessary for

243 To adjust for previous interim analyses, the two-sided statistical significance level for disease-fre

244 We present two-sided statistical tests and correct for multiple com

245 Two-sided statistical tests using conditional logistic r

246 Standard two-sided statistical tests were utilized.

247 f-interest strategies were compared by using two-sided statistical tests.

248 in a bivariate and multivariate model using two-sided statistical tests.

249 k P = .0023), and ORR was 10.6% versus 6.9% (two-sided stratified log-rank P = .0471), respectively.

250 [17.5-22.5]; hazard ratio 0.79 [0.65-0.96]; two-sided stratified log-rank p=0.018); respective overa

251 assigned to combination therapy (P=0.06 by a two-sided stratified log-rank test).

252 alysis of survival was performed by means of two-sided stratified log-rank tests and Cox regression.

253 hs for FOLFOX4 versus 2.7 months for LV5FU2 (two-sided, stratified log-rank test, P <.0001).

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

255 within healthy control animals by using the two-sided Student t test.

256 o further investigate these findings, paired two-sided student's t-tests were performed.

257 ckened mid-Proterozoic continental crust via two-sided subduction can account for both the prevalence

258 opulation means were determined by using the two-sided t distribution for each of the phantom study i

259 A two-sample two-sided t test was used to calculate the P value and t

260 Groups were compared by using a two-sided t test, and a weighted kappa coefficient was u

261 asomotion, the comparison was tested using a two-sided t test.

262 Two-sided t tests (significance level, P = .05) were use

263 sing the Pearson correlation coefficient and two-sided t tests as appropriate.

264 were compared with healthy controls by using two-sided t tests to evaluate statistically significant

265 Two-sided t tests were used for comparisons between trea

266 rmed by using linear regression analysis and two-sided t tests with a significance level of .05.

267 Z scores were compared with paired two-sided t tests, and distributions were compared with

268 Statistical analysis (ANOVA with post hoc two-sided t tests, P < 0.05) revealed that vocal fold dy

269 opic tissue compartments were assessed using two-sided t tests.

270 kills Assessment total score, each tested by two-sided t tests.

271 A two-sided t-test was used to evaluate between-group diff

272 te across two test sets (91.3% versus 83.8%; two-sided t-test, p < 0.001 and 96.5% versus 90.3%; p =

273 Depending on distribution, two-sided t-tests (mean +/- SD) or Mann-Whitney U tests

274 Two-sided t-tests and regression analysis were performed

275 the two regimens (alpha = .2; 1-beta = 0.8; two sided test).

276 aintaining a significance level of 2.5% in a two-sided test for each of the two primary comparisons.

277 ce intervals (CIs), and Wilcoxon signed-rank two-sided test statistics are shown for MAE (19.61 [95%

278 We investigate three one-sided and two two-sided test statistics under Q1 and Q2.

279 id identify an association (exact p = 0.048, two-sided test) between skin type and MC1R variants in t

280 ele approached significance (exact p = 0.09, two-sided test).

281 ch statistical significance (exact p = 0.08, two-sided test).

282 rted with both one-sided and the traditional two-sided tests of significance.

283 The authors, using two-sided tests, found no evidence that exposure in uter

284 ormed using linear mixed-effects models with two-sided tests.

285 es are continuously distributed and based on two-sided tests.

286 we refer to as an in-band detector (IBD) or two-sided threshold.

287 patient responses were compared utilising a two-sided unpaired t test with Bonferroni correction.

288 ard ratio [HR], 0.80 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.03]; two-sided unstratified P = .081), with 5-year EFS of 70.

289 ce of disease (P=0.029, Fisher's exact test, two-sided, verified by permutation to estimate the null

290 Adjusted Cox multivariable regressions had two-sided Wald tests and nominal significance P < .05.

291 Two-sided Welch t tests were used to evaluate mean diffe

292 Statistical analyses, all two-sided, were performed to determine the prognostic ef

293 Oxidative stress is two sided: Whereas excessive oxidant challenge causes da

294 The Shapiro-Wilk test, paired two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test, Spearman rho correlati

295 The two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Student t test, test f

296 tatistical analysis was performed by using a two-sided Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, a logistic regress

297 es were intention-to-treat and P values were two-sided with 95% confidence level set at 0.005 because

298 The statistical tests were two sided, with a type-I error set at alpha of .05.

299 Two-sided z tests comparing cigarette smoking prevalence

300 Proportions were compared using two-sided z tests.