Table 2
Open in new tab

Response rate by different epidermal growth factor ointments’ concentration

ResponseArm 1 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 2 (n = 26), n (%)Arm 3 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 p valueArm 1 vs. 2 + 3 p valueLinear correlation p value
(+)12 (44.4)16 (61.5)21 (77.8).042.028.012
(−)15 (55.6)10 (38.5)6 (22.2)
ResponseArm 1 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 2 (n = 26), n (%)Arm 3 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 p valueArm 1 vs. 2 + 3 p valueLinear correlation p value
(+)12 (44.4)16 (61.5)21 (77.8).042.028.012
(−)15 (55.6)10 (38.5)6 (22.2)

Calculated by Pearson's chi‐square test.

Calculated by Cochran Armitage trend test.

Table 2
Open in new tab

Response rate by different epidermal growth factor ointments’ concentration

ResponseArm 1 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 2 (n = 26), n (%)Arm 3 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 p valueArm 1 vs. 2 + 3 p valueLinear correlation p value
(+)12 (44.4)16 (61.5)21 (77.8).042.028.012
(−)15 (55.6)10 (38.5)6 (22.2)
ResponseArm 1 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 2 (n = 26), n (%)Arm 3 (n = 27), n (%)Arm 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 p valueArm 1 vs. 2 + 3 p valueLinear correlation p value
(+)12 (44.4)16 (61.5)21 (77.8).042.028.012
(−)15 (55.6)10 (38.5)6 (22.2)

Calculated by Pearson's chi‐square test.

Calculated by Cochran Armitage trend test.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close