All data from the in vivo experiments were analyzed using the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS (Enterprise Guide 7.1, SAS Institute Inc., USA). Treatment, period, and steer were assigned to a statistical model. Treatment was considered a fixed effect, and period and steer were considered random effects. Differences between treatment means were analyzed using Tukey’s multiple comparison test. All data are presented as least-squares means. Significance was declared at p < 0.05 and tendency was determined at 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10.
Enterprise guide 7
Enterprise Guide 7.1 is a data analysis software application developed by SAS Institute. It provides a graphical user interface for accessing and managing SAS data and analytics. The core function of Enterprise Guide 7.1 is to facilitate data manipulation, analysis, and visualization tasks through a user-friendly, point-and-click environment.
Market Availability & Pricing
Is this product still available?
Get pricing insights and sourcing optionsSpelling variants (same manufacturer)
The spelling variants listed below correspond to different ways the product may be referred to in scientific literature.
These variants have been automatically detected by our extraction engine, which groups similar formulations based on semantic similarity.
Product FAQ
27 protocols using «enterprise guide 7»
Evaluating Rumen Fermentation Dynamics
All data from the in vivo experiments were analyzed using the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS (Enterprise Guide 7.1, SAS Institute Inc., USA). Treatment, period, and steer were assigned to a statistical model. Treatment was considered a fixed effect, and period and steer were considered random effects. Differences between treatment means were analyzed using Tukey’s multiple comparison test. All data are presented as least-squares means. Significance was declared at p < 0.05 and tendency was determined at 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10.
Clinical Outcomes Analysis Protocol
Analyzing Temporomandibular Joint Structures
Temporomandibular Joint Morphometrics
A descriptive data analysis was conducted. The Shapiro–Wilk test was then used to test the normal distribution. A simple ANOVA was carried out to determine the significance of the data. As the data in each data set was not always normally distributed, different post-hoc tests were undertaken depending on the distribution pattern. For non-normally distributed data sets, the Kruskal-Wallis test was performed, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparison test. If the data was normally distributed, the Tukey multiple comparison test was used. Since the data sets were normally distributed for the evaluation of possible measurement discrepancies between the left and right temporomandibular joint of the animals, a t-test was performed. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant.
Persistence of Patiromer Treatment
Top 5 protocols citing «enterprise guide 7»
Plasma Albumin Predicts Type 2 Diabetes
Adiposity-Dependent Fluid Regulation
Maladaptive Eating Behaviors and Dehydration
COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Transfusion Protocol
COVID-19 convalescent plasma was collected from a local donor recruitment and referral program in collaboration with the American Red Cross. Briefly, in response to guidance from the FDA dated April 3, 2020 We convened a local working group to establish a University of Wisconsin Hospital-based COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma program for both candidate recipients and potential COVID-19 recovered donors. Stakeholders were assigned to issues within their expertise including transfusion, the University’s Office of Clinical Trials, the Media Relations, and the local American Red Cross donor center. The Transfusion Medicine section developed an inventory and ordering process for convalescent plasma units within our electronic medical record system. The Office of Clinical Trials worked closely with American Red Cross and Food and Drug Administration to ensure compliance with rapidly evolving rules. Office of Clinical Trials staff also worked with potential donors identified by University of Wisconsin clinician referral or self-referral through local media coverage and via information provided to patients in the discharge instructions after all COVID-19 related hospital admissions. Potential donors were then screened and recruited to donate via a scripted telephone interview. The local American Red Cross established a process for receiving prospective donors and worked with national leadership to develop long-term protocols.
Recipient data were abstracted from the medical record into a standardized case report form. Results were presented with descriptive statistics. Parametric and non-parametric tests were used as appropriate. All analyses were performed using commercially available statistical software (Enterprise Guide 7.1, SAS, Cary, North Carolina).
Propensity-Matched Comparison of TAVR Valves
Because of the nonrandomized nature of the study, and considering the SDs in baseline characteristics and the year of implantation, propensity score matching was used to control for potential confounders of the treatment outcome relationship. Propensity scores were calculated using logistic regression with valve type as the dependent variable. The propensity score included 38 variables, including baseline characteristics (most of which are listed in Table 1), year of implantation, because the Sapien 3 BE valve was available a few months earlier than the Evolut R SE valve, and hospital procedural volume for TAVR by quartile (full list of variables in the online-only Data Supplement). For each patient with a BE valve, a propensity score-matched patient with an SE valve was selected (1:1) by using the one-to-one nearest neighbor method (with a caliper of 0.001 of the SD of the propensity score on the logit scale) and no replacement. We assessed the distributions of demographic data and comorbidities in the BE and SE valve cohorts with standardized mean differences, which were calculated as the difference in the means or proportions of a variable divided by a pooled estimate of the SD of that variable. A standardized mean difference of ≤5% indicated a negligible difference between the means of the 2 cohorts.
For the outcomes analysis in the matched cohort, the incidence rates (%/y) for each outcome of interest during followup were estimated in BE and SE groups and compared by using incidence rate ratios. The corresponding asymptotic 2-sided 95% CI of the relative risk was reported. A logistic regression model was used for the specific outcomes of pacemaker implantation at 30 days and cardiovascular death. Hazard ratio and odds ratio (OR) were reported. P values are reported without and with correction for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni correction. All comparisons with P<0.05 were considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed using Enterprise Guide 7.1 (SAS Institute Inc) and STATA version 12.0 (Stata Corp).
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!