Sentence examples for tilt p from inspiring English sources

For intra-session SD of normal subjects, there was no significant difference between the two methods for non-rotational planes (tilt p = 0.31 and obliquity p = 0.14) while for inter-session SD there was no significant difference between the two methods in all planes (tilt p = 0.23, obliquity p = 0.16, rotation p = 0.50).

The result shows that on average there are no significant differences between the repeatability of the kinematic waveforms between the two methods for normal subjects across all activities (tilt p = 0.21, obliquity p = 0.09, rotation p = 0.11).

In addition, a statistically significant increase (paired t-test) in internal shank rotation (p < 0.0001), internal hip rotation (p < 0.0001) and anterior pelvic tilt (p < 0.0001) was identified.

Volar tilt (p = 0.0399), radial height (p = 0.0087), radial inclination (p = 0.0051) and articular step-off (p = 0.0002) were all significantly superior in the ORIF group.

In contrast, the ORIF group was significantly superior in all radiographic parameters at 12 months post-injury, including radial height (p = 0.0087), radial inclination (p = 0.0051), volar tilt (p = 0.0399) and articular step-off (p = 0.0002) (Fig. 3).

In the sagittal plane, there was a significant negative correlation between AAA and acetabular tilt (p < 0.001).

Patellar tilting (P = 0.015) and congruence angle (P = 0.018) significantly improved postoperatively.

There were significant correlations between the HRA of right side neck flexion and pelvic side tilt angle (p < 0.05).

There were significant correlations between the HRA value of right side neck flexion and pelvic side tilt angle (p < 0.05).

The movement of scapular posterior tilt was significantly influenced by arm dominance (P = 0.001) and by the interaction of arm dominance and elevation angle (P = 0.002).

The RF configuration is described by the current power P and tilt θ, and the current performance is described by JKPI (see Equation 6).