ライフサイエンスコーパス: not significantly different

1 ts who had received <15 doses (n=34), and -0.0135+/-0.1332 (not significantly different from 0; p=0.655) in those who had

2 o between the first and last MR study was -0.0275+/-0.1917 (not significantly different from 0; p=0.2968) in the entire g

3 nt from 0; p=0.2968) in the entire group, -0.0357+/-0.2204 (not significantly different from 0; p=0.351 in the patients w

4 Growth at follow-up was also not significantly different between groups.

5 The TID of the proteins was high and not significantly different between the foods tested: 97% for

6 Our analysis shows that F erythroblasts are not significantly different from non-HbF-expressing cells and

7 NfL, and MRI measures (AUC range, 0.50-0.81; P < .001) but not significantly different compared with cerebrospinal fluid

8 ar by fine-grained quartz (>5/<50 um), loess, and kaolin is not significantly different from the abrasive-free control di

9 lipoprotein cholesterol (2.63 [95% CI, 2.33-2.94]), but was not significantly different from the rates among those with e

10 Conversely, RNFLT change was not significantly different between trabeculectomy and contro

11 This correlation was not significantly different in adolescents (n = 73) compared

12 In the mITT population, the primary endpoint was not significantly different between the azithromycin and cont

13 The distribution of CFB rs4151667 (L9H) genotypes was not significantly different in the AMD patients compared to t

14 mHg vs. +0.6 mmHg; P = 0.004), although at 4 weeks, IOP was not significantly different than baseline in either group (P

15 For the ACMG genes, the sensitivity of the 2 methods was not significantly different in the prostate cancer cohort (94

16 The cumulative incidence of oncologic mortality was not significantly different between cohorts (P = 0.9584).

17 es (AUC range, 0.67-0.90; P < .05), but its performance was not significantly different compared with CSF P-tau217 (AUC,

18 ge in mood scores over time; mean change in PHQ-8 score was not significantly different from zero (mean difference for ch

19 By contrast, SOCE was not significantly different in TRPC1/6(-/-) pmLF and ROCE was

20 Specificity was not significantly different across the types of interviews.

21 Time to stand was not significantly different between vamorolone-treated and co

22 The primary endpoint of bone metastasis-free survival was not significantly different between the groups (median not re

23 Waiting time to transplantation was not significantly different at an average of 344 days.

24 he hazard ratio (HR) for incident noninfectious uveitis was not significantly different between the FHT and unexposed coh

25 Change in tibiofemoral cartilage volume was not significantly different between the zoledronic acid group

26 erquartile range 17-62) in the ciprofloxacin arm, which was not significantly different (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07; 95%

27 , the mean CFT had decreased to 183 (+/-101) mum, which was not significantly different from the visit before LTFU (P = 0

28 reas the difference between treated and untreated women was not significantly different (P=0.39).

29 transient nerve dysfunction (13.3% vs 10.3%, P = 1.00) were not significantly different between groups.

30 rences between GoCheck Kids and chart acuities (0.010) were not significantly different (P = .319; ICC: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.4

31 RDV AEs occurred infrequently with low severity and were not significantly different between those with and without SR

32 anges in depression, anxiety, and pain catastrophizing were not significantly different between arms.

33 Demographic, laboratory and molecular characteristics were not significantly different between patients on the Beat AML

34 trophil adhesion patterns to microvascular endothelium were not significantly different.

35 TPR and FPR were not significantly different between instruments.

36 and macro- and microelements in the watermelon fruits were not significantly different from the control.

37 Ventricular morphometry and function were not significantly different between the ZO-1cKO versus contro

38 leakage index, microaneurysm count, and ischemic index were not significantly different between eyes with and without DME

39 and experiences of musculoskeletal symptoms and injury were not significantly different by hospital characteristics.

40 roconversion rates, GMT and GMR, number of ILI or LCIs were not significantly different between arms.

41 in the other BVMT-R scores as well as the SRT measures were not significantly different between groups.

42 ng conditions but not in-hospital comorbidity measures were not significantly different by hospital type in most years.

43 or SUR2 (SUR2[STOP]) subunits, contractile parameters were not significantly different from those of WT vessels, suggest

44 In the confirmatory stage, event rates were not significantly different between participants with experie

45 performance gains over the 12-h interval without sleep were not significantly different with or without reward during tra

46 fficile infection and ICU and hospital lengths of stay were not significantly different by treatment group.

47 TE derived strain, the RA reservoir and conduit strain were not significantly different between CMR-FT and the three echo

48 dependent on the level of simulated sunlight, but they were not significantly different between the 2 relative humidity l

49 d cardiac valve calcium scores and pulse wave velocity were not significantly different among the treatment arms.

50 m) at baseline than those receiving ranibizumab, which were not significantly different.