ライフサイエンスコーパス: two-sided

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

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

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

4 All statistical tests were two sided.

5 idence intervals; all statistical tests were two sided.

6 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 All statistical tests were two sided.

11 All statistical tests were two sided.

12 All P values are two sided.

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

14 Log-rank P values are two-sided.

15 All statistical tests were two-sided.

16 All tests of significance were two-sided.

17 Statistical tests were two-sided.

18 All p values were two-sided.

19 All statistical tests were two-sided.

20 All statistical tests were two-sided.

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

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

23 All statistical tests were two-sided.

24 All statistical tests were two-sided.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

39 1.51, demonstrating lack of equivalence, and two-sided 95 percent confidence interval of 1.01 to 1.57

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

56 90% in all patients and in those with COPD (two-sided alpha = 0.05).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

65 25% reduction in all-cause mortality with a two-sided alpha of 0.05.

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

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

68 The two-sided alpha was prespecified at 0.025.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

90 37 subjects without PFO, 5 had an ASA (1.1%, two-sided Fisher exact test, p = 0.028).

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

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

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

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

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

96 Two-sided independent sample t tests assessed any signif

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

98 Two-sided linear and Pearson chi2 tests were calculated

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

135 3; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.07; one-sided P = .055; two-sided P = .11 [predefined significance level of .10,

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

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

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

139 %) versus imatinib (68%; 95% CI, 62% to 74%; two-sided P = .601); therefore, the study did not achiev

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

154 5, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13, 9.99; two-sided p(interaction) = 0.035).

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

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

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

158 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 0.88; two-sided P=0.002).

159 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.97; two-sided P=0.04).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

185 Two-sided statistical tests using conditional logistic r

186 Standard two-sided statistical tests were utilized.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

226 Two-sided z tests comparing cigarette smoking prevalence

227 Proportions were compared using two-sided z tests.