Barely Significant

Excerpts

33,758 sentences · 1 filter applied

highly significantqualifiedgold
It should be noted that the citation-based method (Amsler) has a very low precision, recall, and F1 measure, which means that the relation between the citation-based method based on the Amsler network and the benchmark considering the text-based similarity based on TF-IDF is weak; therefore, the difference between the citation-based and text-based clustering methods is highly significant.
highly significantqualifiedgold
For four variants, the IL23R missense variant encoding p.Arg381Gln (rs11209026; c.1142G>A; MAF = 0.07), the RORC regulatory variant (rs4845604; c.70+225C>T; MAF = 0.14), the TRAF3IP2 missense variant encoding p.Asp10Asn (rs33980500; c.28G>A; MAF = 0.08), and the TYK2 missense variant encoding p.Ile684Ser (rs12720356; c.2051T>G; MAF = 0.09), we observed a large number of highly significant associations (six or more per variant at 5% FDR), including traits with both previously known and novel associations.
Consistent with the literature [ 46 , 58 – 60 ], the NBO regimen applied here did however result in significant increases in ischemic cortex P t O 2 across the two strains (i.e., pooled data)—although within strain these increases did not quite reach statistical significance, probably due to small samples and variable changes.
highly significantqualifiedgold
However, though the difference between angry and fearful body postures was highly significant for this item, both–angry and fearful body postures–were perceived as expressing detesting rather than affection (angry body postures: mean = -1.05, SD = .95; fearful body postures: mean = -2.35, SD = .99; t = 4.25, df = 38, p < .001).
This increase did not quite reach statistical significance but statistically significant increases in ubiquitination of liprin-α1 were observed in immunoprecipitates from cells transfected with the neuronal LNX1p70 isoform ( p < 0.05), which lacks the RING finger domain required for ubiquitination, and LNX2 ( p < 0.05), compared to the control vector ( Fig 3B , upper graph).
VIV in these instances ranged from 0.34 to 0.51 ( Table 3 ), and the model-averaged parameter estimates indicated a positive trend, although 95% confidence intervals overlapped 0, between exposure and age (WS bobcats FIV: β = 0.71, se = 0.47; FR bobcats Toxoplasma: β = 0.57, se = 0.44; FR pumas Toxoplasma: β = 1.08, se = 0.69; Table 4 ).