ライフサイエンスコーパス: two groups

1 test, smoking history, sex and the levels of D-dimer among two groups.

2 n the incidence of delayed PPB and days to bleeding between two groups (0.8% vs 1.3%, p = 0.4; 3.4 +/- 1.94 days vs 4.13

3 enough power to detect any statistical differences between two groups while not over-recruiting participants.

4 posttranslational modification perturb epitope affinity for two groups of widely used monoclonal antibodies.

5 In our model, mice clustered in two groups displaying high or low clinical scores.

6 re applied for natural clustering of MIR and TD-NMR data in two groups.

7 In this retrospective, two-center study, we included two groups of inpatients with severe COVID-19 who had been di

8 We injected two groups with shPKCdelta or shCtrl(PKCdelta) into CeL and t

9 c models of delay propagation, we divided all carriers into two groups exhibiting a shifted power law or an exponentially

10 leted cells, Old World alphaviruses can be categorized into two groups, being either resistant or sensitive to G3BP delet

11 elona (HCB) were prospectively included and classified into two groups; (a) LTP-monoallergic: those that presented reacti

12 ese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) data into two groups, establishing a phenotype of exceptional longevity

13 The radicals are divided into two groups of isomers, named open (O-) and closed (C-), based

14 end of in vitro digestion, the genotypes were divided into two groups: five genotypes had digestibility in the range of

15 A total of 67 CHC patients were divided into two groups; 33 non-diabetic and 34 with T2D.

16 days post-surgery (baseline), subjects were randomized into two groups: (1) toothpaste containing 0.3% triclosan + 2.0% P

17 Patients were subdivided into two groups according to the presence (group A) or absence (gr

18 The two groups had similar FLD at baseline; it progressively impr

19 (p > 0.05) and showed no significant difference between the two groups (p > 0.05).

20 .00), with no statistical significance detected between the two groups (p-value 0.246).

21 The treatment difference between the two groups for 24-h systolic blood pressure was -3.9 mm Hg (B

22 Differences between the two groups were compared for each test.

23 0012) in the mean coefficient of variation (CV) between the two groups with infants developing NEC having more than four-

24 , < 0.001, respectively) differed significantly between the two groups.

25 -0.21] p<0.001), with no significant difference between the two groups.

26 96.9.9%, 88.7%, 80.0%; P = .4) were comparable between the two groups.

27 verage, patient-centered outcomes were compared between the two groups.

28 ence of disability did not differ significantly between the two groups.

29 ence of disability did not differ significantly between the two groups.

30 We observed no differences in safety profiles between the two groups.

31 of adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups.

32 We compared the two groups stratified for WHO grades as: incidence rates, sur

33 At 10 years, bRFS rates for the two groups were 80.5% and 87.4%, respectively.

34 re found between these multiscale nonlinear measures in the two groups at all sensor locations, while visual EEG inspecti

35 The mean baseline LDL cholesterol level in the two groups was 255.1 mg per deciliter, despite the receipt of

36 ver, in later areas V2v and V3v, chromatic responses in the two groups were indistinguishable.

37 8.33) mumol per kilogram of fat-free mass per minute in the two groups, respectively, during clamp stage 2; there were no

38 Raw data and differences from baseline were analysed in the two groups.

39 The rates of hospitalization or death were similar in the two groups.

40 Other secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups.

41 We compared MPRI in the two groups.

42 verity of pain and level of disability, were similar in the two groups.

43 ts with local or systemic adverse events was similar in the two groups.

44 y were collected in a database to evaluate variables in the two groups.Measurements and Main Results: Thirty-five patient

45 The difference between the mean age of the two groups was not significant.

46 ardization to total granule cell numbers indicated that the two groups of wild-caught bats had significantly higher numbe

47 Despite the heterogeneity within the two groups of wines, it was possible to differentiate between

48 These two groups of neurons coincide with glutamatergic and GABAerg

49 survival and overall survival did not differ between these two groups.

50 We carried out practical ultrasound workshops with two groups of 177 and 175 students in two consecutive academi