TABLE 2.

(a) Two‐way analysis of variance shows that there was a statistically significant difference between the TRANSPLANT+PEG group and the TRANSPLANT group (F = 329.8, p < 0.0001), and there were also statistically significant differences across different time points (F = 109.5, p < 0.0001). (b) Through the mixed‐effects analysis of the TRANSECTION+PEG group and the TRANSPLANT+PEG group, the p value and F value of the factor ‘time’ are <0.0001 and 114.6, respectively; thus, time has an impact on the recovery of spinal cord injury. The p value and F value of the factor ‘treatment (TRANSPLANT+PEG group or TRANSECTION+PEG group)’ were 0.6312 and 0.2469, respectively, so there was no significant difference between the TRANSPLANT+PEG group and the TRANSECTION+PEG group

(a) Two‐way ANOVA (TRANSPLANT+PEG group vs. TRANSPLANT group)
	SS	DF	MS	F (DFn, DFd)	p value
Time	2635	13	202.7	F (2.301, 13.80) = 329.8	<0.0001
Treatment	357.1	1	357.1	F (1, 6) = 109.5	<0.0001

(b) Mixed‐effects analysis (TRANSPLANT+PEG group vs. TRANSECTION+PEG group)
	p value		Statistically significant (p < 0.05)?	F (DFn, DFd)
Time	<0.0001		Yes	F (1.531, 13.67) = 114.6
Treatment	0.6312		No	F (1, 9) = 0.2469