Sentence examples for between groups for total from inspiring English sources

Table  1 illustrates that at baseline (T1), there were no significant differences observed between groups for total daily caloric intake, macronutrient intake of protein, or carbohydrate.

From day 3 onward, significant differences were found between groups for total cholesterol, HDL fraction, triglycerides, glycemia and C-reactive protein.

No differences were observed between groups for total GM, total white matter or brain (gray + white) to intracranial (gray + white + csf) volume ratio, regardless of whether age was used as a covariate or not (Table 1).

No significant differences were found between groups for total cholesterol and triglycerides; however, HDL cholesterol was significantly higher in children with T1DM, relative to non-diabetic children.> -wrap-foot> Tested with generalised estimating equations model.

Adjusted for age, self-rated health and ability to manage on income No large or statistically significant differences were found between groups for total costs of pharmaceuticals (p = 0.33), total number of claims for pharmaceuticals (p = 0.10) and amount of the women's co-contribution to the costs of their pharmaceuticals (p = 0.54) (Table  4).

Under double-blind conditions, we found a significant difference between groups for the total symptom score (z = −4.917, p < 0.001) and total number of symptoms reported (z = −5.282, p < 0.001), with sensitives reporting greater symptom severity (mean ± SE = 5.23 ± 1.06, n = 48) and number of symptoms (4.03 ± 0.71, n = 48) compared with controls (1.20 ± 0.18 and 0.92 ± 0.10, respectively; n = 132).

For the primary safety endpoint, the P-value was calculated as the difference between groups for the total proportion of patients who experienced a major adverse event by 30 days.

Thus, statistical significance was determined between groups for the total length of tibia, actual length of tibia, the change in growth rate, percentage growth, and laterality of the limb (right, left, of both) using linear mixed model.

Although a statistically significant difference in favour of the intervention group was found at six months (ratio of means 1.34 (95% CI 1.21 to 1.48)), there were no statistically significant differences between groups for the total number of drugs used (ratio of means 0.98 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.04).

Significant differences were also demonstrated between treatment groups for total reading time, reading error score and binocular accommodative facility (between subjects effects [treatment]) (Table 7).

Significant differences were also demonstrated between treatment groups for total reading time, reading error score and binocular accommodative facility (between subjects effects) (p < 0.05).