The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

432 protocols using spss 13

1

Statistical Analysis Techniques for Research

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 13 software package (IBM, Endicott, NY, USA). Results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD) from at least three separate experiments. The Student t-test was used to evaluate the significance between the two groups, while multiple-group comparisons were evaluated by one-way ANOVA with post-hoc testing. A value of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, asterisks show significant difference between groups as * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Comparative Analysis of Treatment Effects

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data was analyzed using SPSS 13 (IBM, Illinois, USA). The difference between the treatment group and the control group was analyzed using a Dunnett’s t test. The difference among groups was analyzed using ANOVA. The comparison between two of multiple samples were analyzed using the LSD and SNK tests. Categorical data were analyzed using the chi-square test and rank sum test. If P < 0.05, the difference was considered significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Sandfly Density Reduction Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data were entered using EpiInfo version 3.3.5(CDC, Atlanta, GA, USA). Data were checked and cleaned before analysis. Descriptive statistics were explored. The percent changes (PC) of sandfly counts attributed to intervention compared to the control areas was calculated as: PC =(EF/mean (A))100
Where, EF (effect of intervention) = [median(B) – median (A)] – [median (D)-median (C)]; and A=baseline median sandfly count for the intervention area; B=post-intervention sandfly count for the intervention area; C=baseline sandfly count for the control area; D=post-intervention sandfly count for the control area. Effect is negative or positive if sandfly density is decreased or increased after intervention and the effect should be zero if sandfly density is same as at baseline. Difference of sandfly count between pre and post intervention measurement for both intervention and control areas were assessed. Comparison of median difference in sandfly density between intervention and control areas was done using Mann-Whitney U test and p-value was reported. All calculations were performed by SPSS 13 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) and STATA 10 (Stata Corp LP, College Station, TX, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis in Cancer

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 13 (IBM, Armonk, NY). The differences in categorical variables such as age, sex, tumor location, size, gross pattern, depth of invasion, differentiation, micropapillary adenocarcinoma, LVI, LNM, and perineural invasion were calculated between the groups using the χ2, Fisher exact test, or Kruskal-Wallis H test. In multivariate analysis, the odds ratio (OR) with the confidence interval (CI) at the 95% level was calculated, and P value <0.05 was defined as the critical value of the evaluation factor included in the final risk model. The assignment of points to risk factors was based on a linear transformation of the corresponding β regression coefficient. The coefficient of each variable was divided by the lowest β value and rounded to the nearest integer (18 (link)). The scoring points of the patients were added and divided into 3 LNM risk categories: low risk (<3%), intermediate risk (3%–19.6%), and high risk (>19.6%) (18 (link)). The classification models were compared based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC). The value of this metric ranges from 0 to 1, and a higher score is preferred.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Statistical Analysis of Biological Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 13 (IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) and SAS 9.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). All experiments were performed thrice, and the data were expressed as the mean ± SD. Statistical analysis of the results of western blotting was conducted using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Statistical analysis was independently conducted by two biostatisticians using Fisher's exact test for any 2 × 2 contingency tables and Pearson's χ2 test for non-2 × 2 tables. The Kaplan-Meier method was employed for the survival analysis, and Cox regression analysis was utilized for the univariate and multivariate analyses. Differences with probability level of P < 0.05 were deemed to be statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Histometric and Micrometric Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For the histometric and micrometric analyses, mean ± standard error of the mean and mean CSA were calculated. The data were further analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS.13) software, a brand of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), SPSS Statistics, New York, USA. Two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's Multiple Range Test were used. The mean values at p < 0.05 were considered as significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Comparative Salivary Flow and Oral Intake

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All the statistical analyses were done using IBM SPSS 13. The distribution of categorical variables such as gender, diagnosis, indication of intubation, etc. was expressed as frequency and percentages. The continuous data such as age, duration of intubation, FOIS score, salivary flow, etc. were expressed as mean with standard deviation or median with interquartile range (IQR). Comparison of baseline characteristics between the groups was done using the Chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, Mann Whitney U test, and Independent Student t-test. The longitudinal change of salivary flow and oral intake status were compared between groups using Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance (RMANOVA) and Mann Whitney-U test respectively.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Comparative Analysis of Experimental Treatments

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All treatments were performed in triplicates, and data are expressed as mean ± SD. Mean and SD were calculated by Microsoft Excel 2016 software (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). Statistical comparisons were made by a two-tailed Student’s t-test using IBM SPSS 13 software (Version 22, New York, NY, USA). Differences were regarded as statistically significant for p < 0.05 and extremely relevant for p < 0.01. The line graphs were generated by GraphPad Prism 5 software (GraphPad Software Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA). The combined graphs were generated by Adobe Photoshop CS5 and Adobe Illustrator CS5 (Adobe Systems Inc., San Jose, CA, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Statistical Analysis of Oral Reactions

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
SPSS 13 (IBM, Armonk, NY) software was used for statistical analysis. Continuous quantitative data were presented as mean ± standard deviation. Differences among groups were compared using the Student t test. Categorical data were presented as rate (percentage) with differences among groups analyzed using Chi-square test. Nonconditional multivariate logistic analysis was performed to test the independent correlated factors of acute oral mucosal reaction. Statistical analysis was tested on two-sided settings, with P < .05 considered as statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Factors Associated with Cognitive Impairment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The subjects were classified into groups with more than 24 points or less than 24 points on the MMSE. Demographic, clinical, and BMD values were compared between the 2 groups. Clinical variables were analyzed using independent t tests, χ2 tests, and 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine independent factors of cognitive impairment after adjustment for potential confounders, including sex, age, hypertension, diabetes, current smoking status, education, and BMD. To avoid variable selection caused by multicollinearity correlations, only variables that showed P < .1 in univariate analysis were included in the multivariate logistic regression model. A 2-sided P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 13 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!