Sentences with phrase «p values <»

All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20.0 for Windows (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) and p values of 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001 were used for significance.

P values of less than 0.05 were considered significant.

Children in the Parent Training condition engaged in significantly more deep breathing than those in the Control or Distraction conditions (p values <.05).

Parents in the Control condition used more commands to cope than parents in the Distraction or Parent Training conditions (p values <.05).

At postprocedure and at the 3 - month follow - up, parents in the Parent Training condition reported significantly higher scores than those in the Control or Distraction conditions, indicating greater knowledge that apologizing increases distress (p values <.05).

∞ p values under maternal sensitivity are based on independent t tests statistics and p values under atopic dermatitis are based on Chi square test statistics

Specifically, children who were adherent with respect to accelerometer wear and their parents were more likely to be White as compared with children who were not adherent with respect to accelerometer wear and their parents (77 % vs. 61 % for children, and 85 % vs. 72 % for parents, p values <.01).

The GLMM p values and degrees of freedom for the Chi square tests were computed via the likelihood ratio tests through the package «afex» (Singmann et al., 2014).

The two subgroups did not differ with respect to other demographic characteristics, child BMI, the parenting styles, or MVPA, all p values >.05.

There was a significant effect of condition on children's engagement in distraction, F (2, 81) = 22.99, p <.001, η2 =.36, with children in the Distraction and Parent Training conditions engaging in more distraction than children in the Control condition (p values <.05).

Parents in the Parent Training condition encouraged children to engage in deep breathing significantly more than parents in the Distraction and Control conditions (p values <.05).

The 20 siblings for whom home visit data were not available, or not analyzed owing to missing comparisons, were no different from the 67 for whom data were available and analyzed in terms of ethnicity / race (White / non-Hispanic vs. other: χ 2 [1, N = 85] = 1.3, p =.26), gender (χ 2 [1, N = 85] = 0.6, p =.44), age (t = 0.31, p =.75) or any of the classroom - based measures (t values < 1.65, p values >.10).

Follow - up analyses revealed that parents in the Parent Training condition engaged in distraction significantly more than those in the Control or Distraction conditions (p values <.05).

Correlations between the questionnaire and log ranged from 0.37 to 0.47, all p values <.0001.

All statistical procedures were performed with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 16.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and p values were two - tailed and considered statistically significant when the values were below.05.

Associations between the outcome variables and sociodemographic and smoking variables were assessed using logistic regression to generate odds ratios (ORs) and P values based on Wald tests.

The reported degrees of freedom and t and p values are those for which equal variances were not assumed.).

Differentially methylated regions from the microarray analysis with varying p values (between 0.0001 and 0.03 with FDR < 0.2) and fold differences (Log2 CPA / Controls between 1.1 and 0.5) at the probe level were selected for validation.

All of the p values were calculated using a right tailed Fisher's exact test and corrected for multiple comparison with the Benjamini - Hochberg method.

We used the formulas of Mullen (1989) to transform the test statistics χ 2, F, t or p values into correlation r.

Whenever it could be estimated, the p values changed only slightly, suggesting that the models are robust and that familial clustering had only a minimal impact on the findings.

Male and female patients did not differ significantly on any CTS2 violence perpetration or victimization subscale (all p values >.05).

There were no significant effects on other child or parental domains and the effect sizes on conduct problems, though not reported in the conventional way, are likely to be small judging by the p values (0.041 immediately; 0.034 at six months).

As predicted by the I - Change Model, P values of attitude, social influence and self - efficacy increased after taking intention into account.

Printed and on - line questionnaires had similar reliability and validity (all P values > 0.05).

Results of grouped t tests and Mann - Whitney U tests to show t or z values, degrees of freedom, and p values for the significant differences in the changes in scores between the control and intervention group

We implemented unadjusted and adjusted analyses (potential prognostic factors listed in table 2) of the outcomes (all quantitative) by using random effects linear regression models fitted by maximum likelihood estimation to allow for the correlation between the responses of participants from the same maternal and child health centre.29 We present means and standard deviations for each trial arm, along with the mean difference between arms, 95 % confidence intervals, and P values.

Results of grouped t tests and Mann - Whitney U tests to show t or z values, degrees of freedom, and p values for the differences in the changes in scores from baseline to follow up between the control and intervention group

These p values are indicated in the results tables with ‡ (p ≤ 0.05) and § (p ≤ 0.001).

Specifically, SAAF and control subjects with inflammation data were identical in terms of sex, family and neighborhood SES, parenting quality, externalizing behavior, and cigarette smoking (all t values > 0.90, P values > 0.36; Table 1).

However, these youth did participate more actively in SAAF, attending a mean of 5.11 sessions vs. 4.45 for those subjects without inflammation data, and their mothers showed greater improvements in parenting across the trial (Table S1; all P values > 0.02).

All P values are 2 - tailed.

At study entry, they were identical to the broader sample in terms of demographics, parenting quality, and mental health (Table S1; all P values > 0.15).

Probability values (p values) derived from the interaction term between maternal education and age indicate whether PRs and PDs at ages 5, 7 and 11 were statistically significantly different from those at age 3 (baseline).

Factors with p values < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were adjusted for age, gender, baseline viral load and glucose.

After adjustment for the covariates and for each other, there was no evidence for an association among any of the 3 maternal parenting dimensions and child BMI status (all P values were ≥.69).

P values and 95 % CIs were obtained by using Wald tests adjusted for the survey design.26 Interactions of parenting variables with the BMI status of the corresponding parent, for all but the combined parent analyses, were investigated and only included in the final model if statistical significance was < 5 %.

The P values from this truncated data analysis were virtually identical to the analysis of ranks, so the results are reported from the truncated analysis.

To account for multiple comparisons, P values of ≤.01 were considered significant.

No evidence was found for interactions between maternal and paternal parenting variables and the BMI status of the respective parent for any model (all P values >.05), and these were not included in the final models.

Significant differences were identified in the bivariate and multivariable analyses employing factor loadings, regression analysis p values, and, where applicable, comparisons of 95 % confidence intervals (z set to 1.96).

We used 2 - sided P values of less than.05 as the criterion for statistically significant differences.

Using logistic regression analysis, odds ratios, 95 % confidence intervals and significance p values were estimated for association between each outcome and each childhood measure individually and in models including all childhood measures, each adjusted for cohort and gender.

We compared the pharmacy access group with the clinic access group and the advance provision group with the clinic access group; we present P values for both comparisons.

The p values using the nine climate variables (denoted as «Overall» in Table 4) of MMEs are larger than the threshold (0.05, significant level = 5 %), which means that, according to this analysis, these ensembles have not been shown to be unreliable.

In MMEs, the number of climate variables with p values smaller than the threshold is zero, which means these MMEs are reliable for all the variables investigated.

In Table 4, p values of the nine climate variables (plus SAT trend for the ensembles performing the historical simulation) are also shown.

On the other hand, the p values of many of the results from the SMEs are smaller than the threshold.

p values less than 0.05 indicated by the bold font

This may be totally off, since I know squat about climate science & the high - powered statistical programs used, but when there is a dearth of data in the social sciences (not enough to give low enough p values on correlations & regressions, simply due to small numbers of data, which is sometimes due to loading in too many control variables), we sometimes turn to chi - square & log - linear analysis to see if actual data reveal patterns incongruent with expected patterns.