Exact(1)
In particular, using the radio-soundings BRIN, LIBR, and LIRE we obtain a hazard area of 933, 955 and 991 km2, respectively, whereas the reanalysis datasets NOAA1, NOAA2 and ERAI give a hazard area of 966, 962 and 972 km2, respectively.
Similar(59)
All cause mortality was 15.3% (151 deaths) in the placebo group and 11.9% (116 deaths) in the carvedilol group, giving a hazard ratio of 0.77 (0.60–0.98) and a significance of p=0.031.
This result gave a hazard ratio of 0.92 (95% CI 0.79 1.08), which was not significant (P = 0.32).
Histology gave a hazard ratio of 0.41 with 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.64 and P value <0.001.
This sample size (n = 350) allows for a log-rank test at a fixed time given a hazard ratio ≤0.68 at alpha = 0.05 with a power of 95%.
This model gave a hazard ratio of 0.895%5% confidence interval 0.65 0.98), so a higher proportion staining is associated with a better prognosis.
Subsequent to our data collection, a randomised open label study of discontinuation versus maintenance treatment reported relapse rates of 43% and 21%, giving a hazard ratio of 0.42.
After adjusting for these factors, the model gave a hazard ratio of 3.0 (CI = (1.4, 6.7)), indicating a significant difference between admission experience of the cases and controls.
Post-operative performance status ⩽70 vs 90 gave a hazard ratio 0.08 with 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.15 and P value <0.001.
Post-operative performance status ⩽70 vs 80 gave a hazard ratio of 0.34 with 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.54 and P value <0.001 for overall survival.
Of those, 20% (the median in this material), gave a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.2 (P = 0.01 by log rank test).
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