All the patients were having ALT value more than 150 IU/L with mean SGPT was 1202.2 [+ or -] 867.587 U/L (z-value
: 6.64 and p-value <0.0001; statistically significant).
TABLE 1 Effect of the number of larvae and nymphs included in the pools on the probability of detecting Ricketssia spp Range of pool size for larvae: 3-55 Factor Coefficient SE Z-value
P Intercept -0.14 0.85 -0.17 0.865 Pool size 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.926 Range of pool size for larvae: 3-1427 Factor Coefficient SE Z-value
P Intercept 0.23 0.36 0.65 0.517 Pool size -0.00 0.00 -0.73 0.462 Range of pool size for nymphs: 3-51 Factor Coefficient SE Z-value
P Intercept -1.23 0.58 -2.14 0.0325 Pool size 0.20 0.08 2.35 0.0190 The analyses were conducted for two groups of larvae that differed in the range of larvae included in the pools.
The second model was calculated with data from motor performance tests (motor performance model, two variables) and used the mean z-value
of general motor performance items (YY, CMJ, 40 m, AG) and the mean z-value
of technical skill items (DR, PA, JU).
In any [P.sub.R]-mode run, although the z-value
has been ignored by the computer, subsequent comparison will reveal that it matches the generated post-halt value.
Table 6 Regression Coefficients of the Multiple Linear Regression Model Predicting Attitude Toward Local Food and Total Variance Associated with Attitude Toward Local Food within Each Treatment Group Group Variables [beta] t p Local Economy (Constant) 107.06 .00 ** Treatment Z-value
of ECO .43 5.84 .00 ** Z-value
of SOC .24 3.25 .00 ** Social Connection (Constant) 111.58 .00 ** Treatment Z-value
of ECO .65 10.29 .00 ** Z-value
of SOC .09 1.46 .15 Group [R.sup.2] Adjusted F Model p [R.sup.2] Local Economy .380 .374 64.89 .00 ** Treatment Social Connection .513 .509 113.14 .00 ** Treatment
Once the Z-value
and P value have been calculated, we can say that there is enough evidence for all values below the critical value Z or -1.645; we can reject the null hypothesis and we can state that the mean of the proposed method with perturbation is lower than the mean of the other method without perturbation with a 95% of confidence and this Z-value
is shown in Table 8.
Attributes Coefficients(SE) Z-Value
Moderate Premium 0.40504 (0.04139) 9.787 Maximum Premium 0.16194 (0.04264) 3.798 Prompt Claims 0.52872 (0.03424) 15.442 Satisfactory Customer Service -0.05928 (0.03432) -1.727 Proximity Near 0.23173 (0.03435) 6.747 Constant -0.48887 (0.03775) -12.950 Number of observations 5600 AIC 7380.1 Likelihood ratio [chi square] 395.14 Prob> [chi square] 0.0000 Attributes P-Value [95% Conf.
Mean balanced accuracies and mean specificities of Z-value
aggregations were always higher than those of the respective Westgard-like algorithms.
is to calculated according to the Equation 3.
These studies generally consider the regional and temporal variations of seismotectonic b-value, seismic quiescence Z-value
, and some other statistical parameters for the analysis of earthquake behaviors, and their possible usage as precursors.
We performed a post hoc analysis when the Chi Square test turned out to be significant; this was done in a similar way as proposed by Beasley & Schumacher  using the corrected residuals (z-value