The phrase "assessment were statistically" is not correct in English.
It should be "assessments were statistically" or "assessment was statistically" depending on the intended meaning. You can use it when discussing the statistical analysis of assessments or evaluations in a research context.
Example: "The assessments were statistically significant, indicating a strong correlation between the variables studied."
Alternatives: "evaluations were statistically" or "analysis was statistically".
The increase in mean score of both theoretical and practical assessment was statistically significant (p < 0.0001).
The difference in FACT-F mean values between the baseline and the first post-treatment assessment was statistically significant (P<.001).
Paired t-tests were used to test the hypothesis that average change in study outcomes from baseline to the 8-week follow-up assessment was statistically greater than zero.
The mean change from baseline in the PAC-QOL score at the final on-treatment assessment was statistically significantly greater in the prucalopride group (–0.79 (s.d., 0.84)) than in the placebo group (–0.59 (s.d., 0.82); P=0.0158); a reduction in PAC-QOL score indicates an improvement.
In the clinical trials, all assessments were statistically greater for the tazarotene foam 0.1% as compared to the vehicle foam.
Comparisons with pre-morbid values within groups (gait variables, arthritis scores, and histological assessments) were statistically tested using paired t-tests.
At week 24 of ADEPT, all HRQOL assessments were statistically significantly improved in adalimumab-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients, with the exception of the short form 36 health survey (SF-36) mental component summary (MCS) mean score and the SF-36 role emotional domain mean score.
In addition, none of the secondary endpoints (LFI, VAS of pain, NSAID intake, and patients' and investigators' global assessments) was statistically different from placebo after 1 year.
With the exception of the Black skin group, this sex-related difference in self-assessment was statistically significant in all skin type groups (P<0.0001).
Linear correlation (Spearman and Kendall) between the dental fluorosis levels and the change in affected dental enamel area as determined by QLF assessments was statistically significant.
