randomization list graphpad statmate version 1.01i (GraphPad Software Inc)
90
Structured Review
GraphPad Software Inc
randomization list graphpad statmate version 1.01i
Randomization List Graphpad Statmate Version 1.01i, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/software+program+statmate/randomization+program+graphpad+statmate+version+1+01i/pmc05341642-37-7-10
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
Randomization List Graphpad Statmate Version 1.01i, supplied by GraphPad Software Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/software+program+statmate/randomization+program+graphpad+statmate+version+1+01i/pmc05341642-37-7-10
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
randomization list graphpad statmate version 1.01i - by Bioz Stars,
2026-11
90/100 stars
Images
Related Articles
Sequencing:Article Title: Treatment regimens for administration of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents for neovascular age-related macular degeneration Article Snippet: Equivalence of baseline characteristics: baseline characteristics by group not reported Interventions Intervention: intravitreous bevacizumab 1.25 mg injection (Avastin; Roche, Basel, Switzerland) Intervention 1: PRN (variable dosing) Intervention 2: every 4–6 weeks (fixed-interval dosing) Follow-up: 12 months Frequency of assessments for retreatment: every 4–6 weeks Outcomes Primary outcome, as defined: improvement in BCVA and CRT at 12 months Secondary outcomes, as defined: none reported Adverse events: ocular and systemic adverse events Review outcomes not reported: mean change in CRT, quality of life, cost Intervals at which outcome assessed: every 4–6 weeks Notes Full study name: not reported Trial registration: not reported Funding sources: Department of Ophthalmology and University Research Board of American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon Declarations of interest: quote: "The authors indicate no financial interest in any product discussed in this study." .. Study period: May 2009 to October 2009 Subgroup analyses: none reported Risk of bias Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: " Selection:Article Title: Treatment regimens for administration of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents for neovascular age-related macular degeneration Article Snippet: Equivalence of baseline characteristics: baseline characteristics by group not reported Interventions Intervention: intravitreous bevacizumab 1.25 mg injection (Avastin; Roche, Basel, Switzerland) Intervention 1: PRN (variable dosing) Intervention 2: every 4–6 weeks (fixed-interval dosing) Follow-up: 12 months Frequency of assessments for retreatment: every 4–6 weeks Outcomes Primary outcome, as defined: improvement in BCVA and CRT at 12 months Secondary outcomes, as defined: none reported Adverse events: ocular and systemic adverse events Review outcomes not reported: mean change in CRT, quality of life, cost Intervals at which outcome assessed: every 4–6 weeks Notes Full study name: not reported Trial registration: not reported Funding sources: Department of Ophthalmology and University Research Board of American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon Declarations of interest: quote: "The authors indicate no financial interest in any product discussed in this study." .. Study period: May 2009 to October 2009 Subgroup analyses: none reported Risk of bias Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: " other:Article Title: The Effectiveness of Articaine and Lidocaine Single Buccal Infiltration versus Conventional Buccal and Palatal Injection Using Lidocaine during Primary Maxillary Molar Extraction: A Randomized Control Trial Article Snippet: The treatment allocation was predetermined by generating randomization list using |