Summary of the effect of MPDD on SDLP across all participants, and also participants categorized by driving styles (“NS” (no significant), “+” (significant increase), and “-” (significant decrease)). by Mobina Faqani (22783963)

“…<p>Summary of the effect of MPDD on SDLP across all participants, and also participants categorized by driving styles (“NS” (no significant), “+” (significant increase), and “-” (significant decrease)).…”

Summary of the effect of MPDD on ART and TIBL across all participants, and also participants categorized by driving styles (“NS” (no significant), “+” (significant increase), and “-” (significant decrease). by Mobina Faqani (22783963)

“…<p>Summary of the effect of MPDD on ART and TIBL across all participants, and also participants categorized by driving styles (“NS” (no significant), “+” (significant increase), and “-” (significant decrease).…”

NN analysis to assign the importance of variables. by Sulmaz Ghahramani (3387635)

Differences in experience with IT across groups based on awareness of threats. by Simon Vrhovec (11714748)

Differences in age across groups based on awareness of threats. by Simon Vrhovec (11714748)

Positional cloning of <i>qNN1</i> on chromosome 16. by Xinxin Li (281237)

Correlation and significance. by Amer Hamad Issa Abukhalaf (22031327)

“…Across all regression models, neither threat possibility nor threat severity showed statistically significant associations (p > 0.01) with preparedness intentions. …”

<i>GmNN1/FT2a</i> expression analysis. by Xinxin Li (281237)

Differences in experience with information security across groups based on awareness of threats. by Simon Vrhovec (11714748)

Steps taken to mitigate threats to trustworthiness. by Aimee Hairon (20390367)

Variance Significance Factor (VSF). by Amer Hamad Issa Abukhalaf (22031327)

“…Across all regression models, neither threat possibility nor threat severity showed statistically significant associations (p > 0.01) with preparedness intentions. …”

Comparative analysis of macronutrient compositions between baseline and end of intervention (*p < 0.05, ^ns Non-significant results). by Duc Tran Quang (20564967)

Comparative analysis of caloric intake between baseline and end of intervention (*p < 0.05, ^ns Non-significant results). by Duc Tran Quang (20564967)

Differences in awareness of threats across genders. by Simon Vrhovec (11714748)

Mean values and 95% confidence intervals for recovery time, Average NN Interval (AVNN); Standard Deviation of NN Intervals (SDNN), Low Frequency/ High Frequency Ratio (LF/HF); and... by Robert Trybulski (10998702)

Conservation category of each sampling area based on species scores and threat scores. by Brian M. Myers (19825736)

Possible threats, their descriptions and mitigation using our proposed scheme. by Iqra Ilyas (19996005)

Major threats—characterized by the highest level of agreement between stakeholder groups—that affect the most significant receivers identified by all stakeholder groups. by Tarsila Seara (8934920)

Comparison of the threat reaction with vs. without pairing. by Zineb Hayatou (21492065)

“…<b>(C)</b> Top: difference between the horizontal eye movements in response to synchronous pairing of the artificial limb, versus no-pairing. Blue sections: significant differences (Bootstrap-based test <i>p</i> < 0.05). …”

Clinical and laboratory measurements of patients with ALS (N = 13; Mean±SD; ns = not significant; nd = not determined; * = evidence of subgroup responsiveness). by Ann Logan (9361)