Exact(5)
For internal consistency testing, we accepted an alpha of ≥0.75.
We aimed for a statistical power of 80% and accepted an alpha level of 5%.
We used the SAS statistical software for the analyses (SAS institute, Cary, NC, version 9.2), and accepted an alpha level of 5% as statistically significant.
We used the SAS statistical software version 9.2 for the analyses (SAS institute, Cary, NC) and accepted an alpha level of 5% as statistically significant.
we used chi-square statistics to determine differences between the two participating companies and accepted an alpha level of 5% as statistically significant.
Similar(55)
Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, 112 subjects were necessary to achieve a statistically significant difference.
Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of < 0.20 in a bilateral contrast, we would need 90 patients in each group [ 33].
Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, 191 participants were necessary in the observed group to recognize a difference ≥10%.
Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, and assuming a standard deviation of 0.11 mm, 40 subjects were seen to be necessary, assuming a dropout rate of 5%.
Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of 20% in a bilateral contrast, 222 subjects are required in each group to detect a difference of at least 5% (calculations based on EPIDAT v. 3.1).
Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of 0.20 in a bilateral contrast, 36 patients would be required in each group to detect a difference of 1,000 € or more.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com